The following debate originally took place upon the Facebook wall of an ex-acquaintance…
Brian K.: The Anti-Vaccine Movement: A Terrible Track Record:
“As it turns out, the anti-vaccinationists are remarkably consistent. Time and time again, they are shown to be wrong. I’m not sure how many times a group needs to be wrong before people stop seeing them as credible. Perhaps people need to be reminded of how many times this group has been wrong?”
Genaire: I can’t say for certain how wrong or right they are, I can say for certain that most medicine’s side effects are far worse then the illness they have been created to treat. I would think the same would apply to vaccinations. I would also ask myself why would I want to get vaccinated when my body’s own immune system can do the same thing in most cases without the side effects.
Brian K.: First off, that story was a hoax.
I think you vastly overestimate the strength of your own immune system. Look at how many people died (or severely infirmed) by smallpox, polio, etc. The point of a vaccine is to introduce a weakened version of the virus into your body so the immune system gets advanced practice/preparation if the real thing comes along.
Terrel G.: The effects of vaccine-preventable diseases include death and permanent mental or physical disability, and are far more frequent that the side effects of vaccines, which are extraordinarily rare. Prior to vaccination, there were massive epidemics of vaccine-preventable diseases, causing massive human suffering. The notion that the immune system is magical and infallible has no basis in medicine. In fact, the immune system is a relatively recent evolutionary development and has numerous side effects, including allergies and autoimmune diseases, sometimes fatal.
Genaire: Brian, I never said I believe that society has no use for certain vaccines. What I was pointing out was the fact that big Pharma has created several vaccines that serve no purpose for the vast population. I for one have had flu several times in my life yet I have lived to tell about it each and every time.
Genaire: and that’s just one example.
Rayn: If you’re going to debunk the Desiree Jennings story, Brian, providing a much better article would be helpful. Three quarters of the main links on the one you supplied say “page not found” when clicked upon. That would include link 1, link 3, and link 4. Only link 2 actually works… As for the section on the bottom, entitled, “For the antidote, peruse these links,” link 1, link 2, link 3 also say “page not found,” too, with only the last four links working…
Completely unsatisfied with the lack of information in the article you shared, I did a quick search, and found this one, which seems much more solid:
Flu Shot Woman:
But, this is neither here, nor there, as the connection between certain influenza vaccinations and neurological disorders is NO HOAX, nor is it psychogenic.
One example that easily comes to mind (since my father is Narcoleptic) is the link between the H1N1 influenza vaccine, “Pandemrix,” and Narcolepsy:
Miller et al. Risk of narcolepsy in children receiving an AS03 adjuvanted AH1N1 (2009) influenza vaccine in England. (2013). British Medical Journal.
Partinen et al. Increased incidence and clinical picture of childhood narcolepsy following the 2009 H1N1 pandemic vaccination campaign in Finland. PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e33723.
Nohynek et al. AS03 adjuvanted AH1N1 vaccine associated with an abrupt increase in the incidence of childhood narcolepsy in Finland. PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e33536.
Eurosurveillance editorial team. Swedish Medical Products Agency publishes report from a case inventory study on Pandemrix vaccination and development of narcolepsy with cataplexy. Euro Surveill. 2011;16(26):pii=19904.
Another example that comes to mind is the US goverment issued Swine Flu vaccination campaign, and its link to an “outbreak” of the highly-debilitating Guillain-Barré syndrome:
Flashback March 24, 1976: Ford Orders Swine Flu Shot for All:
As I wrote in my article, “America suffered from a previous outbreak of swine-flu in 1976. Interestingly, this particular outbreak began at an Army base in Fort Dix, New Jersey. The background is as follows: after a recruit died mysteriously, an autopsy was performed, and it was determined that swine-flu had caused his death. Testing began and army doctors soon realized that at least 500 soldiers were also infected, though none were ill. Under pressure from health officials, who saw a possible pandemic on their hands, then-President Gerald Ford spent $125 million funding a mass inoculation program – aimed at protecting the American public. However, within weeks, some who took the shot began to develop ‘Guillain-Barré syndrome, a paralyzing nerve disease. Within two months, 500 individuals were affected, and more than 30 died.’ The public responded angrily, and the program was stopped.
The moral of the story: while swine-flu claimed only one victim, the vaccine claimed over 30 lives, and crippled nearly 500 individuals!” And, of course, millions in tax dollars were squandered on this exercise in FUTILITY!
These examples are a harsh reminder that vaccines should only be recommended for use against the MOST DEADLY or MOST DESTRUCTIVE VIRUSES, and ONLY DURING AN ACTUAL or IMMINENTLY EMERGING PANDEMIC! To do anything outside of these medical guidelines is almost guaranteed to be POLITICALLY or FINANCIALLY motivated! And, history shows that giving out flu vaccinations to the public when there is no real threat taking place is just a recipe for human calamity!
Aside from this, groundbreaking research into the efficacy of vaccinations against flu strains have yielded some unexpected results, including the potential for an emergence of vaccine-resistant strains of influenza:
Paradox of Vaccination: Is Vaccination Really Effective against Avian Flu Epidemics?
According to the article, “vaccines might provide immunological pressure on the circulating strains, which might engender the emergence of drifted or shifted variants with enhanced potential for pathogenicity in humans. Therefore, although vaccination programs have been recommended recently, some field evidence indicates that vaccination alone will not achieve eradication. Moreover, if not used appropriately, vaccination might result in the infection becoming endemic.”
The article also states, “An important issue related to influenza epidemics is the potential for the emergence of vaccine-resistant influenza viruses. The vaccine-resistant strain, in general, causes a loss of the protection effectiveness of vaccination (there is experimental evidence of the loss of the protection effectiveness for antiviral-resistant strains ). Consequently, a vaccination program that engenders the emergence of the resistant strain might promote the spread of the resistant strain and undermine the control of the infectious disease, even if the vaccination protects against the transmission of a vaccine-sensitive strain.”
These are just a few of the more troubling excerpts from the article, but I would suggest that you read it FULLY for yourself – without skimming!
Rayn: And, let us not forget that influenza isn’t the only place where problems have arisen, as I also recall a STRONG CONNECTION between the HPV vaccine, Gardasil, and DEATH:
US Court Pays 6 Million to Gardasil Victims:
For the CDC to recommend that all female children be injected with Gardasil in the name of “medicine” is ABSOLUTELY CRIMINAL! There is NO SCIENTIFIC reason to expose children – WHICH ARE NOT IN ANY PARTICULAR RISK GROUP for INCREASED EXPOSURE to ANY STD – to such a virus (whether it is a “denatured” version, or not), nor to expose them unnecessarily to the typically neurotoxic, often allergy-inducing ingredients contained within the vaccines, themselves! The HPV vaccination agenda is absolutely MONETARILY MOTIVATED!
Speaking of Polio, I suggest that you read these article about the Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV), which has since been discontinued for use in the United States (but, only since 2000) – and, yet, is pushed upon unsuspecting third world countries by the UN, through the World Health Organization (WHO):
The True Story of SV40, the Cancer-Causing Virus Hidden in Polio Vaccines:
Merck Vaccine Scientist Dr. Maurice Hilleman Admitted Presence of SV40, AIDS and Cancer Viruses in Vaccines:
Polio Vaccine in India Causes More Paralysis than Wild Form of Polio:
Incidence of Polio Among Vaccinated Children Alarms Govt:
And, let us not overlook the more recent scandal regarding the Mumps vaccine:
Merck Vaccine Fraud Exposed by Two Merck Virologists; Company Faked Mumps Vaccine Efficacy Results for Over a Decade, Says Lawsuit:
Meanwhile, none can dismiss the fact that those with the most compromised immune systems and those with the rarest disorders will VERY OFTEN be harmed by ANY DEGREE of the sub-standard ingredients placed inside of most vaccines – many of which are NEUROTOXIC – nor, can they withstand the allergy-inducing pig, monkey, chicken, and/or human cells contained within! Besides this, many will inexplicably have an adverse reaction, regardless of the ingredients. But, in case you find this to be an “acceptable loss,” I would remind you of an important fact: determining that the “weak” should suffer and die from vaccinations in the name of rest of humanity’s health is really just a modern-day form of EUGENICS – once again, wrapped up in scientific jargon, of course, and once again, pushed almost exclusively through use of the medical community!
Of course, this is not uncommon in today’s world, as there are other such examples of soft EUGENICS taking place often in America, hidden in plain view of an unsuspecting populace. Here’s a good example:
Homeland Security To Test Biological Sensors In MBTA Tunnels:
As the article states, ”federal officials say they test the subway sensors by releasing dead bacteria called B-subtilis.” Don’t worry, though! It “has been rigorously tested and has no adverse health effects for low exposure in HEALTHY individuals.” *whew!* Good thing I’m not a sick person! Oh, shit… Wait a minute… I’m Autistic, and a disability self-advocate… Hmmm… Damn it! That means I should be speaking up for the sick, not calling for them to be placed into the front-lines of danger in the name of the “greater good.” *sigh* Oh, the complications.
Besides this, let us NEVER forget that Illinois-based pharmaceutical company, Baxter International, was caught in March 2009 attempting to distribute Influenza vaccines contaminated with deadly live Avian Flu Virus to 18 different countries around the world, putting the entire human population at risk, and almost causing a global avian flu pandemic. Upon discovering both H5N1, and the human form, H3N2, in what should have been flu vaccines, the National Microbiology Laboratory in Canada thwarted the efforts of Baxter International by alerting the World Health Organization, who took quick and decisive action to prevent pathological disaster:
Vaccines as Biological Weapons? Live Avian Flu Virus Placed in Baxter Vaccine Materials Sent to 18 Countries:
And, OF COURSE, Baxter International Inc., just so happens to own the rights to “Celvapan,” the world’s first cell-culture based H5N1 (avian flu) pandemic vaccine! Apparently, though it was still in trial stages at the time, it was very close to receiving full market authorization from the European Union. In other words, if a global avian flu pandemic ever did take place, Baxter International would be in a position to make a great deal of money!!!
Baxter’s Cell Culture-Based Pandemic Flu Vaccine Receives EMEA Positive Opinion:
When it comes to vaccines, there is MUCH money to be made, and the use of CHEAP, subpar, corner-cutting ingredients like formaldehyde, aluminum and mercury, in lieu of the more safe alternatives that are available, are just too alluring to the profit margin of the corporations that manufacture them! Besides, as the Baxter example illustrates, ANY “mistake” made in the manufacture of such vaccines creates the potential to destroy as many human lives as the viruses they purport to protect against – if not, MORE!
Terrell G.: Genaire, Influenza is very unpredictable. In a typical flue season, the majority of people do not become dangerously ill (in 2013, 0.4% of flu victims were sick enough to require hospitalization), and deaths are mainly of children (the last flu season killed 131 children) and the elderly. But influenza mutates and hybridizes rapidly, and every once in a while a really bad strain comes along that combines high mortality with high infectivity. The 1918 flu killed over 50 million people, many of them healthy people in the prime of life. It is not possible yet to know in advance how severe a flu season is going to be. So the vaccine is not intended so much to protect you (as a presumably young, healthy adult) from the typical flu strain (although not getting sick is better than getting sick), but rather from the atypical, deadly one.
Genaire: As you pointed out Terrell Gibbs influenza is very unpredictable and as such a vaccination for last year’s strain would be useless for the mutated strain that comes in the year that follows. Therefore just another money-making ploy.
Terrell G.: It is untrue that there is ” STRONG CONNECTION between the HPV vaccine, Gardasil, and DEATH.” In fact there is no evidence of a statistically significant incidence of any serious adverse effect. Note that clinical trials of Gardasil included thousands of women, so any genuinely strong connection between Gardasil and death would have been detected before the vaccine was released to the general public. Also keep in mind that over 21,000 women a year develop cancer due to HPV.
By the way, the vaccine court is not a typical court; it is a special court designed to give the benefit of the doubt to the plaintiff. In particular, it does not require that it be proved that an adverse event is caused by the vaccine. The vaccine court provides compensation if it is at all plausible that a vaccination *might* have caused an adverse event. It even pays for the plaintiff’s lawyer, win or lose. It is designed this because vaccination is not merely a benefit to the individual, but to the entire community, because the greatest benefit of vaccination is that it reduces the rate of spread, so that an epidemic dies out before it can really get started (a phenomenon known as “herd immunity.”)
Terrell G.: Genaire, that’s why they don’t give you last year’s vaccine for this year’s strain. The reason vaccination for flu is annual is that each vaccine is specifically tuned to this year’s flu strain.
Note that it is not true that drug companies make a great deal of money off vaccination. The big money makers for the drug companies are the drugs that you take every day, not something you take once a year, or in some cases once or twice a lifetime. Drug companies produce flu vaccine as a public service, and the resources dedicated to producing vaccines would be far more profitable if used to produce other products.
Genaire: There is no way of knowing what this year’s strain would be unless you’re designing and releasing it yourself unless of course one o of those vaccines mentioned gives you some sort of clairvoyance and I assure you these drug companies are not doing this out of the kindness of there heart. If everyone in the world is expected to be vaccinated that sounds like big money to me especially when the amount of vaccinations you have to take us in the double digits.
Genaire: The flu shot cost 31.99 note times that by everyone in the United States. I don’t know about you but I would like to have that money go into my pocket. Note that’s just the cost of one of the vaccines they are peddling.
Rayn: It is absolutely TRUE that there is a strong connection between Gardasil and death, Terrell. And, lest we forget, the “clinical trials” you mention are conducted by the DRUG COMPANIES, themselves, who are duty-bound by their stock-holders to profit from their products! Read the information I posted above about the SV40 cancer virus that was adulterating the oral polio vaccine (OPV) for decades, with the knowledge of this fact covered up by researchers and administrators, alike, and then tell me all about your faith in the love that soulless corporations have for humanity, and their complete lack of corruption and greed, historically!
Gardasil Is Probable Cause of Girls’ Deaths: Brain Histology Study:
As the article states article quotes from results published in the journal Pharmaceutical Regulatory Affairs, “The results from our IHC examinations of brain tissue specimens from two young women who died following vaccination with the qHPV vaccine Gardasil showed strong evidence of an autoimmune vasculitis triggered by the cross-reactive HPV-16L1 antibodies binding to the wall of cerebral blood vessels. In addition, there was clear evidence of the presence of HPV-16L1 particles within the cerebral vasculature with some HPV-16L1 particles adhering to the blood vessel walls.
NOTE: IHC = immunohistochemical qHPV vaccine = quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine. Gardasil is the only quadrivalent HPV vaccine. HPV-16L1 refers to antibodies formed in response to antigens presented by the Gardasil vaccine.”
Sexually active females are those in risk of contracting the STD version of HPV, NOT children. To vaccinate the youth against such a virus is completely unscientific, to say the least, and outright criminal, when it results in death! Personally, I would NEVER get the HPV vaccination, as I am NOT a member of any risk group, since I only have one sexual partner – my husband – and am in a monogamous relationship with him. Yet, doctors CONTINUE to pressure me into getting the shot, regardless, simply because I am female, without even discussing my sexual history, or activity. That is NOT science! That’s misuse of authority to push a pre-packaged vaccination agenda!
In HS, I was forced by school policy into receiving an unnecessary Hepatitus B vaccine because the campus was located in a low-income neighborhood (since, apparently, poor people are either promiscuous, or early to engage in sexual activity). Yet, at the time, I was not, nor had I ever been, sexually active. Meanwhile, it was all paid for by Medicaid, wasting tax dollars, unnecessarily. Sounds VERY SCIENTIFIC, right? Wrong! I’m an individual, and no amount of statistics can pre-determine my choices in life, my activities, nor my behavior based solely on my gender, my financial status, nor the area where I live! As you admitted yourself, Terrell, vaccines are based on concept of the HERD. Yet, since I am Individually Sovereign, I will continue to use the logic of critical thinking to voluntarily reject the groupthink-based system of fallacy driving most vaccination campaigns of today!
To say that pharmaceutical companies make more money off daily drugs than vaccines is fine. But, to jump to the non-sequitur conclusion that the companies therefore not interested or capable of turning a profit from vaccines is ludicrous. You might as well say that Johnson and Johnson isn’t interested in making glasses, nor the profit that comes with it, simply because they make disposable contact lenses, which are more profitable.
Terrell G.: Genaire, utter nonsense. An epidemic does not arrive full-blown; it has to build up. So there are invariably early outbreaks that make it possible for vaccine developers to figure out what predominant strain is going to be before the flu season starts in earnest. And with modern nucleic acid sequencing, it’s possible to check the accuracy of the prediction. They don’t get it right every single year, but they have a quite good batting average.
Genaire: Media over emphasizes these “epidemics”. I remember some years back the whole swine flu nonsense. People will die from illness that’s just a part of life everyone will have to deal with. I mentioned before I do feel vaccines serve a role in society but i also feel the media under the direction of big Pharma hype the severity of these illnesses. Also doing a good job in “figuring out” what will be the predominant strain and sounds to me still like a lot of guess work in which the pharmaceutical companies are the only ones to benefit 100 percent of the time.
Genaire: Brian, I know exactly what a vaccine is, serving in the military for several years being stationed overseas I’m almost certain I have been given more vaccinations then the two of you combined. My point is however and has remained we have been over vaccinated by several very large corporations that have billions of dollars to gain from this practice even when the vaccination isn’t needed. They are adding substandard ingredients to these vaccinations such as mercury.
Terrell G.: Genaire, where do you get this nonsense? In fact, mercury has been virtually eliminated from US vaccines over the years, although its elimination increases the cost of vaccination and (particularly in parts of the world where adequate refrigeration is not available) increases the risk of bacterial contamination. In the US, the mercury-containing antibacterial agent thimerosal is present only in multi dose fiu vaccines, and more expensive single-dose flu vaccines without thimerosal for those who are paranoid about mercury. In fact, there is no evidence whatsoever of any harm from the minuscule amount of thimerosal present in this vaccine. Older Americans such as myself, whose parents dabbed every cut and scrape with mercury antiseptic were exposed to far, far more mercury. Again, the notion that vaccines are a big moneymaker for the pharmaceutical industry is nonsense. The really big money is not in vaccines that are taken at most (in the case of flu vaccine) once a year, but in drugs that are taken daily to treat chronic illness, and also in over-the-counter “nutritional supplements” which are very cheap to make because there is no requirement for quality controls or evidence of purity and efficacy.
Genaire: The nonsense Terrell comes when you assume that they are not making money off these shots. The flu shot alone is 31.99 in the cvs now you times that by all the people who take it each year and well that sounds to me like big bucks and that just one of the shots that is given. As children the amount of vaccinations given is in the double digits, of course the pharmaceutical companies make more off other medications but you can’t discount the billions made off vaccinations. As far as mercury goes any use even in small quantities of this medal when a safer alternative is available is in my opinion a crime that’s like saying of their is only a little lead in my walls. I see why you are so for the pharmaceutical companies by your job title and educational background but you can rest assured, your job is safe. Vaccination do have a place in society as I mentioned I am against the over vaccination that the drug companies are pushing. Every year they seem to come up with a new epidemic in which isn’t an epidemic at all in an attempt to get more people to run and get more of these shots that yes do increase there profit margin but as I pointed out above from you job title your are biased on this fact since you have made your money on the back of this very industry.
Terrell G.: Genaire, $32? Are you kidding? There are drugs that cost hundreds or even thousands of dollars for a single dose. You’ll spend more than that for a year’s supply of vitamins–and a vitamin manufacturer does not have to go to the trouble and expense of researching what the most likely strain for this year will be and reformulating, manufacturing, and testing a new vaccine every year. And flu vaccine is an extreme case; most vaccines are taken a few times in a lifetime. So the resources that a pharmaceutical company devotes to developing and producing vaccines would yield greater profit if invested in almost any other product.
And no, there is no safer alternative to thimerosal, particularly in countries where reliable refrigeration is unavailable, but if you are paranoid about it, you can pay extra for the single-dose vaccine. And in fact, *none* of the established side effects of vaccines are due to thimerosal. Which shouldn’t surprise anybody capable of thinking about it rationally–the tiny bit of mercury you might get from an annual flu vaccine dose is utterly dwarfed by mercury in the diet and from other environmental sources.
It is the hallmark of the crank to insinuate that anybody who disagrees with their nonsense is motivated by financial gain. So for the record, while I am an academic pharmacologist and I know a great deal about drugs and health, I research drugs, I don’t make them. My personal research does not concern vaccines or vaccination (as anybody can see by looking up my papers on PubMed), I have never received any income from a vaccine manufacturer, and I have no financial interest whatsoever in any company that manufactures or distributes vaccines. What I do have, in common with most people in the biomedical field, is a concern for the public health, and I regard the kind of groundless paranoia that you are spreading as a grave threat.
Genaire: To say they aren’t making money on a product marketed to everyone is insane. They may make more money per person on a painkiller or an antidepressant but these drugs aren’t marketed to everyone as vaccinations are. People on average aren’t buying vitamins but they are all being vaccinated either shortly after birth or with the season flu vaccine (or the yearly trumped up epidemic vaccination) or both and all cost money. Can you deny that billions are being made by the drug companies on vaccinations annually? Them making more on other drugs is irrelevant.
As far as the side effects of thimerosal goes: A small amount of toxin introduced intravenously is far different then the inhalation or ingestion of that same toxin.
As far as your education goes I never said or thought that you had a hand in making the drugs since you made no mention of being a chemist. To say you haven’t benefited from the pharmaceutical industry is like saying a diesel mechanic doesn’t benefit from the trucking industry. Pharmaceutical companies are just that companies and all companies and corporations are money driven show me one not for profit pharmaceutical company…
Terrell G.: Genaire, I see that you are also ignorant of pharmacokinetics. No, it doesn’t matter whether a substance gets into the bloodstream by injection or by absorption from the GI tract. Once it is in the blood, it is in the blood, and it goes everywhere in the body, except that there are some drugs that do not move readily fro the circulation into the brain. The form of mercury that you get from food, methyl mercury, moves very freely throughout the body (including into the brain), and is less readily eliminated than thimerosal–which as far as anybody has been able to determine is entirely benign at the trace levels of exposure provided by vaccines (which considering that it is present only in one kind of flu vaccine, is a maximum of one dose per year).
And no, it wouldn’t make one cent of difference to me if the pharmaceutical industry stopped selling vaccines altogether (I might be dead from polio or another vaccine-preventable disease, but that’s another manner). None of my funding sources are dependent upon vaccines. Besides, if not for vaccines, there would be a lot more disease and death, which would increase motivation to devote resources to biomedical research, so I might even benefit a bit.
And it would not make an appreciable difference to the financial health of the pharmaceutical industry, either. The resources they devote to developing, producing, and distributing vaccines would simply be devoted to other products–and almost anything is more profitable than vaccines. A product that is taken daily could be taken by only 1% of the population and that would still be far, far more doses sold a year than any vaccine. So if the pharmaceutical industry stopped making vaccines, it is likely that their profits would *increase.” Pharmaceutical companies make vaccines, not because they are a big profit source, but because is it a service to the public that improves their reputation–which perhaps earns them a bit of slack with respect to the high prices of the drugs that *are* real money makers.
Genaire: Your lungs and liver filter most toxins before being absorbed into the blood, you have no such filtration when a chemical is directly infected. I didn’t say your job was based off the pharmaceutical industry selling vaccines I said you benefit from the existence of said industry. With out drugs to peddle you would need no drug dealers (now would you?). As far as how much money they make in comparison to other drugs they push it’s still ranges in the billions and market tactics are used for products that fight illness that can honestly be treated with proper diet and exercise.
Genaire: As far as any ignorance goes I’m not ignorant to the fact that if we had no pharmaceutical industry we would have no pharmacists and maybe you would have found a more noble role like nutritionist.
Terrell G.: Genaire, I’d say your ignorance goes deeper than I thought. I’m not a scientist. I don’t dispense drugs. I’m an academic pharmacologist and a basic researcher. That means that I study biological signaling–for example, the way things like neurotransmitters and hormones work. This is work that is fundamental for understanding of the way the body works in sickness and in health. Which, by the way, also includes understanding of nutrition. So my employment does not depend in any way upon the profitability of the pharmaceutical industry.
Genaire: Pharmacology (from Greek φάρμακον,pharmakon, “poison” in classic Greek; “drug” in modern Greek; and -λογία, -logia “study of”, “knowledge of”) is the branch of medicine andbiology concerned with the study of drugaction, where a drug can be broadly defined as any man-made, natural, or endogenous (within the body) molecule which exerts a biochemical and/or physiological effect on the cell, tissue, organ, or organism. Ie someone that benefits from the pharmaceutical industry.
Rayn: I would say that it is either “ignorant” or “the hallmark of the crank to insinuate” that corporations aren’t absolutely duty-bound by their stockholders to continuously expand and maximize company profits by every means available, Terrell, at the very risk of being dissolved! This is a well-know legal fact that has been thoroughly established in US courts time and time again. For a recent example, take the 2010 Ebay vs. Craigslist lawsuit, at the Delaware Court of Chancery. In his decision, Chancellor William B. Chandler, III stated, “Jim and Craig opted to form craigslist, Inc. as a for-profit Delaware corporation and voluntarily accepted millions of dollars from eBay as part of a transaction whereby eBay became a stockholder. Having chosen a for-profit corporate form, the craigslist directors are bound by the fiduciary duties and standards that accompany that form. Those standards include acting to promote the value of the corporation for the benefit of its stockholders. The “Inc.” after the company name has to mean at least that. Thus, I cannot accept as valid for the purposes of implementing the Rights Plan a corporate policy that specifically, clearly, and admittedly seeks not to maximize the economic value of a for-profit Delaware corporation for the benefit of its stockholders—no matter whether those stockholders are individuals of modest means or a corporate titan of online commerce.”
These oh-so-humanity-loving, do-gooder pharmaceutical corporations you shill for have been caught RED-HANDED polluting the fresh waters of the Earth with their toxic “products,” as well as the bi-products of such “goods”:
Missouri Pharma Company Fined $2.5 Million for Polluting River:
World’s Highest Drug Pollution Levels Found In Indian Stream:
Pharma Pollution is Out of Control in China:
So, what’s next? Will you now claim that other scumbag companies have done this same thing historically, so it’s okay, or not a big deal? Will you claim that this sort of criminal activity acts as a form of “herd drug dosing,” perhaps? Will you boldy claim that it is absolutely no reflection on the ETHICAL BANKRUPTCY of the MILLIONAIRE companies guilty of this crime!? Ha! I can’t wait to read your explanation for the BLIND RELIGIOUS FAITH you have in these soulless corporations!
I, for one, WILL NOT be dropping to my knees, and opening my mouth, ready to swallow a load of SHIT from these pharmaceutical companies, nor the spin-doctors who obscure their crimes!
Meanwhile, to condone any use of mercury in vaccines – which is DONE PURELY AS A COST-SAVING measure in disregard (aka “ignorance”) of healthy alternatives – illustrates that you are a victim of corporate “science,” and as expected, hold CONTEMPT for the ACTUAL SCIENCE that dictates mercury to be a TOXIC HEAVY METAL! And, let us not forget that the level of mercury required to induce toxicity in a healthy individual is MUCH HIGHER than that of someone who is already SICK! Therefore, the use of mercury as a form of “medicine” REEKS of EUGENICS, once again! The weaponized language required to murder our fellow human beings may have changed, as well as the titles of the criminals who push for it, but the “War Against the Weak” still continues, unabated!
And, while you isolate and compartmentalize vioxthe effects of each and every one of the toxic ingredients in vaccines, as though they were being all used separately – in pure defiance of reality – solely to downplay their damaging results – I’d ask you to please show me a SINGLE study out there that explores the SYNERGISTIC TOXIC effects of simultaneously introducing ANY combination of mercury, formaldehyde and aluminum intravenously into the human body! I’ll wait…
Terrell G.: Genaire, it sounds like you don’t even understand your own definition. So if I study the effect of an “endogenous (within the body) molecule which exerts a biochemical and/or physiological effect on the cell, tissue, organ, or organism.” (which I do) I benefit from the pharmaceutical industry?
In reality, the relationship is the other way around. The pharmaceutical industry often benefits from the work of academic pharmacologists. We do the basic research which clarifies the ways the body’s endogenous (i.e. natural) signaling molecules work, and this often reveals biological “targets” which can be affected by drugs to achieve therapeutic goals.
But of course, the crank cannot believe that somebody can have an honest difference of opinion. Anybody with a divergent opinion must be a “shill” in the pay of the evil pharmaceutical companies–what biomedical scientists refer to as “the pharma shill gambit”
Yes, mercury is toxic if you have enough of it in your body. But as Paracelsus tells us in a maxim that has been proved over and over by scientists, “the dose makes the poison.”
And the amount of mercury that enters the bloodstream from vaccinations is much less than enters the bloodstream from dietary sources, and dietary mercury (methyl mercury) is also a more harmful form of mercury.
When I was a child, my parents dabbed mercury antiseptic onto every cut and scrape. But mercurochrome was taken off the market and thimerosal was eliminated from all childhood vaccines over a decade ago. Believers in the idea of mercury as the great evil of vaccines confidently predicted that autism and ADHD would vanish within a few years. Have you checked the autism statistics lately? Where, pray tell, is the great health benefit from the massive reduction in childhood mercury exposure?
Prediction is very important in science. When we scientists make a prediction and it turns out not to be correct, we accept that we were wrong, discard our hypothesis and formulate a new one. But no amount of evidence will persuade a crank to abandon his fixed belief–there will always be some excuse, some rationalization.
Genaire: Most of the points you’ve just made you have mentioned already and yes I do understand my definition which is in fact the wiki definition. Your job is to basically understand how these drugs/poisons work within the body. You are obviously not in anyway listening to a word I’m saying so poised on proving your point which is a non point for as I mentioned before I do believe in the use of said vaccines. I don’t believe in the overuse of medications when the bodies own immune system in most cases can fight off the infections. As I and Rayn have tried to make you understand the pharmaceutical companies have marketed these drugs not because they have the pros best interest at heart they market then because profit can be made. You can question our intelligence all you like but a fact is a fact and when you try to overlook facts I question your intelligence or motivations.
Rayn: “No amount of evidence will persuade a crank to abandon his fixed belief–there will always be some excuse, some rationalization,” says the man who states that mercury was removed from childhood vaccines, in one breath, then turns around and says it’s not dangerous when present inside of other vaccines. Oh, the irony! Talk about DOUBLE-THINK!
Meanwhile, some tetanus, diptheria and meningococcal vaccines STILL contain mercury, so your whole “thimerosal was eliminated from ALL childhood vaccines over a decade ago” is PROVABLY FALSE!
Check table 3 of this FDA page as proof:
And, the above link gives information on the United States, alone. It’s completely Ameri-centric to view the USA as if it were a reflection on the entire world! There are other countries have even more childhood vaccines containing mercury, and those vaccines are made by some of the SAME COMPANIES listed in table 3! Yet, to use mercury in countries that haven’t banned it (or, at least, recommended it be removed), while simultaneously owning the patent to safer alternatives that are mercury-free is proof that these soulless corporations could care less about the health of humanity! Or, am I really to believe that “science” changes from country to country, rather than the laws that protect citizens? LOL! These pharmaceutical companies care only about their bottom line: PROFIT!
Terrell G.: By the way, I’ve noticed that formaldehyde is the latest bugaboo of antivaccine cranks. This is particularly ridiculous, because formaldehyde is naturally present in the body at much higher levels–it is a product of normal metabolism. The amount of formaldehyde that can fit into a vaccine injection is a very small drop in a very large bucket.
Terrell G.: Rayn, rationalizing that there is still some tiny bit of mercury remaining doesn’t help you. You can’t get around the fact that there has been a *massive* reduction in mercury exposure from vaccines and disinfectants. One of the basic principles that toxicologists learn to distinguish a real effect of a substance from an imaginary one is that a real effect is dose dependent. As was known even in Paracelsus’s time, if the dose is reduced, the effect should be reduced. So I ask again, where is the health benefit from the reduction in mercury exposure?
Rayn: You said that it was removed from ALL childhood vaccines. Now that I proved you wrong, you’re simply rationalizing, Terrell! More of that amazing double-think, I suppose.
Rayn: LOL! Don’t worry, Terrell! Mercury is good for children! I know this because the “experts” told me so!
Also, lead paint chips are good for them, as well as asbestos! Apparently, these substances increase their test scores in school! The FDA/EPA approved them, because they CARE!
Rayn: As human beings, we are just herd animals! Thus, we require loving, caring corporations and governments to think for us, or we’d all eat poison, and die!
Genaire: It seems to me the cranks have very little to gain while as we continuously point out that all those involved in the pharmaceutical industry are set to make a fortune and yes you have benefited financially from the pharmaceutical industry. Funny thing is most of these illness can be prevented out lessened with proper nutrition but I guess you can’t make as much money on fruits and vegetables as you can with a chemistry set.
Rayn: Also, you can’t create an intellectual dictatorship over the lowly human herd using mere fruits and vegetables!
Brian K.: Genaire and Rayn, you’ve sunk to ad hominem, strawman, and other ridiculous ends which shows you have no interest in legitimate debate that does not conform to your paranoia and cognitive dissonance.
Rayn: Oh, yeah, Brian? Show me where I did that. Then, I’ll point out the “ignorant” and “crank” ad hominem attacks your buddy used, first! Keep the order straight, son! Stop selectively spotlighting replies, as that is PURE FALLACY! Nice try, my friend, but it WON’T WORK. It’s all in BLACK-AND-WHITE, right above us, if you care to read it!
Rayn: I’m not the one to falsely accuse, pal! I ASSURE YOU of that.
Genaire: Brian what strawman do you speak of? I look at the side effects of these medications and to tell you the truth in most cases I’ll take the disease.
Rayn: I want to know EXACTLY where I attacked. I’m VERY INTERESTED in knowing, so I can SHUT THAT STATEMENT DOWN with the QUICK-FAST! Provide EVIDENCE, now.
Rayn: Dude repeatedly says “crank” and “ignorant” and Brian swoops in like a knight in shining armor to defend and save him. Classic! Can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen, my man!
Brian K.: This isn’t your kitchen. This isn’t your soapbox. This is an article I posted on my timeline and you came here as the aggressor. You spread your conspiracy theories, propaganda. You conjured up financial motivation despite the fact that vaccines are relatively cheap and NOT a money maker for pharma companies. You go off about mercury in vaccines (hypocritical since you are an autistic-self advocate) despite tons of data that shows, rather lack of data to support, any harmful effect.
But you still cling to your story and lash out at Terrell and myself for not being convinced. You have no honor when throw outrageous accusations of bias and motive because of my friend’s (whom I’ve known longer than you two) academic and professional credentials.
Since you opened the door, what are your credentials? Do have any scientific training or skills in data analysis?
Rayn: Kitchen? I don’t get it. Soapbox? LOL. Keep dreaming, buddy. Conspiracy theories? Propaganda? Prove it, please! “Conjured up financial motivation”? Prove it, please! And, where is the evidence of these ad-hominem attacks you mentioned? I’M STILL WAITING…. “Lash out at Terrell”? Proof, please. He is the one who said “crank” and “ignorant.” And, I still patiently provided FACT, even in the face of such language, and logical fallacy. What a crock! You’re completely biased, and have no problem telling lies about me. What are your credentials for saying any of these things to me, or about me, Brian? I’ll wait…
Rayn: I wrote of the biological dangers, first and foremost, THEN and ONLY THEN, provided a good reason for the lack of concern for health as being a financial one. Nice try, though, Brian. You are OBVIOUSLY BIASED, and you just proved it with these “conspiracy” and “propaganda” labels you are throwing at me (ad hominem attacks, by the way). What hypocrisy!
Rayn: Now, show me where I ad hominem attacked your friend, who wrote “crank” and “ignorant.”
Brian K.: “Can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen, my man!”
Soapbox refers to a platform to speak and rant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soapbox
I don’t need to disprove your claims. You need to provide sound evidence since you claimed it. Lacking such, we fall back to the prior state of information (null hypothesis).
“I see why you are so for the pharmaceutical companies by your job title and educational background but you can rest assured, your job is safe. Vaccination do have a place in society as I mentioned I am against the over vaccination that the drug companies are pushing. Every year they seem to come up with a new epidemic in which isn’t an epidemic at all in an attempt to get more people to run and get more of these shots that yes do increase there profit margin but as I pointed out above from you job title your are biased on this fact since you have made your money on the back of this very industry.”
“I didn’t say your job was based off the pharmaceutical industry selling vaccines I said you benefit from the existence of said industry. With out drugs to peddle you would need no drug dealers (now would you?).”
As far as any ignorance goes I’m not ignorant to the fact that if we had no pharmaceutical industry we would have no pharmacists and maybe you would have found a more noble role like nutritionist.”
“As I and Rayn have tried to make you understand the pharmaceutical companies have marketed these drugs not because they have the pros best interest at heart they market then because profit can be made. You can question our intelligence all you like but a fact is a fact and when you try to overlook facts I question your intelligence or motivations.”
Terrell G.: Rayn, it was removed from all childhood vaccines. It is no longer added as a preservative to any childhood vaccine. All that remains is a minuscule trace where thimerosal was used as an inactivating reagent for killed-virus vaccines, which is impossible to remove completely. So the point remains is that has been a massive reduction in exposure to mercury from vaccines. So where is the health benefit that the antivaxxers so confidently predicted?
Rayn: I don’t see EVEN ONE of my posts within your so-called “evidence,” Brian. Meanwhile, the very first “example” you provide is NOT an ad hominem fallacy, as the fact that your friend is in the pharmacological field is VERY RELEVANT to the discussion, while Genaire’s comment to him contains NO actual ATTACK AGAINST HIM to speak of! Yet, your friend is the one who said “crank” in response to it, and before the rest of your “examples,” making them all moot in attempting to implicate Genaire, or myself, as making any personal attacks.
Terrell G.: Be careful, Brian–next thing you know, you’ll be a Pharma Shill too. I have it on good authority that the pharmaceutical industry has been known to utilize statistics….
Genaire: No just you Terrell 🙂
Rayn: “Can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen, my man!” was stated after you made your incredibly false “ad hominem” claim against me, so I really hope you weren’t trying to use that as evidence, Brian.
Rayn: And, I don’t need an explanation for “soapbox.” I know what that is, Brian. I’m talking about that mysterious “kitchen” comment you made, which I find SUSPECT. I want to know what you meant by it.
Rayn: And, I’m still waiting for proof of the ad hominem attacks I engaged in, too…
Terrell G.: Rayn, well, duh. “Ad hominem” means literally “to the person.” It is the argument that something about the individual is relevant to the truth or falsity of his thesis. So when you insist “the fact that your friend is in the pharmacological field is VERY RELEVANT to the discussion” you are admitting to the fact that you are making ad hominem argument–albeit an irrational one, since I do not work in the pharmaceutical industry, and am in no way dependent on that industry for income or employment. My only interest in vaccines is the humanitarian interest that all human beings share, and my professional interest as a scientist and educator to see that the correct information is known.
Brian K.: That is some spectacular [mental] gymnastics. You keep using those words, “evidence,” “proof,” “attack.” I do not think they mean what you think they mean. If there is no agreement on the most basic of terms/standards then this is pointless bickering and I will no longer participate.
“Arguing with a fool proves there are two.” ― Doris M. Smith
(or in this case, 4)
Rayn: And, as I said before, Terrell, “Meanwhile, some tetanus, diptheria and meningococcal vaccines STILL contain mercury, so your whole ‘thimerosal was eliminated from ALL childhood vaccines over a decade ago’ is PROVABLY FALSE!
Check table 3 of this FDA page as proof:
You replied with, “Rationalizing that there is still some tiny bit of mercury remaining doesn’t help you. You can’t get around the fact that there has been a *massive* reduction in mercury exposure from vaccines and disinfectants.”
Now, you’re just backpeddling, after attempting to raise the goalpost, unsuccessfully.
Rayn: Yeah, right, Brian. You don’t have a leg to stand on with your accusations against me, so I figured you’d fall back into your place of silence. Your rescue attempt failed.
Rayn: You call it “mental gymnastics” to falsely accuse others, in an attempt to distract from the debate. I call it disgusting.
Terrell G.: Rayn, how is it “raising the goal posts” when I’m asking the very same question. Here, I’ll repeat it for you:
“Where, pray tell, is the great health benefit from the massive reduction in childhood mercury exposure?”
The fact that a tiny trace of thimerosal cannot be completely eliminated does not make the reduction in mercury exposure due to the elimination of the use of mercury as a preservative and disinfectant anything other than massive. You have not yet answered the question.
So same goal, Same FAIL
Brian K.: Terrell, keep One Point.
Rayn: Well, duh, Terrell. Ad hominem “is an argument made personally against an opponent instead of against their argument.” What Genaire stated about your background was relevant to the topic, and was not his “argument,” but his assessment of why you would dismissively state, “Where do you get this nonsense?” which is an ACTUAL personal attack, does nothing to further your points, and actually came before all of the other attacks (“crank,” “ignorant”), setting a negative pace for the rest of the debate.
Rayn: “How is it ‘raising the goal posts’ when I’m asking the very same question,” you ask, Terrell? Simple. You said that “thimerosal was eliminated from all childhood vaccines over a decade ago,” and when I disproved it, you replied with “Rationalizing that there is still some tiny bit of mercury remaining doesn’t help you. You can’t get around the fact that there has been a *massive* reduction in mercury exposure from vaccines and disinfectants.” Hence, raising the goalpost.
Terrell G.: Rayn, I see. So you are so personally invested in your argument that criticizing your *argument* as the nonsense it so clearly is is viewed as an attack against your person. This certainly sheds light on why you cling to your belief even though a rational person would view the lack of any clear health benefit from massive reduction of mercury exposure as compelling evidence that it is wrong.
Rayn: To say “this makes no sense,” is not the same as the highly accusatory and dismissive loaded question, “Where do you get this nonsense?,” Terrell. Tell me HOW EXACTLY that comment furthered your argument, please. I’m very curious.
Genaire: Terrell maybe some people just don’t wish to have any amount of poison introduced into there system if they can avoid it. I’m sure a small amount of arsenic won’t kill me by why would I knowing ingest our better yet have it injected into my veins if I can avoid it.
Rayn: And, which “belief” do I cling to? Please, do tell, Terrell. I have a feeling you don’t even KNOW or CARE about my position, since you ignored so much of what I wrote, anyway.
Terrell G.: Rayn, once again. Same question, same goalpost:
“Where, pray tell, is the great health benefit from the massive reduction in childhood mercury exposure?”
You have produced no evidence against (or even attempted to dispute) my premise that there has been massive reduction in exposure to mercury from vaccines and antiseptics. So the question stands and your failure to answer it stands.
By the way, it occurs to me that you probably lack the scientific knowledge to interpret the table you cited. Keep in mind that any chemical test has a lower limit of the amount that it can reliably detect. So if the test fails to detect a substance, a scientist will often report the result as “< x” where x is the minimum that the test can detect. In other words, it means “undetectable.”
Rayn: “You have produced no evidence against (or even attempted to dispute) my premise that there has been massive reduction in exposure to mercury from vaccines and antiseptics,” you say, Terrell? That’s because I don’t provide evidence for red herrings.
Terrell G.: Genaire, “maybe some people just don’t wish to have any amount of poison introduced into there system if they can avoid it”
But of course you *can’t* avoid it, because most substances are poisons at some dose. People have been poisoned by excess water, or by excess oxygen. So the idea of dividing nature into “poisons” and “non poisons” is fundamentally irrational. Any rational discussion of whether something is poisonous must specify the dose.
Genaire: You grew up with your parents rubbing mercury on your cuts and I’m sure you had lead in your paint but that doesn’t make it safe to have been used. Even a trace amount of poison is still poison.
Genaire: I totally agree some poisons are found in nature but why willing allow someone to inject you with poison if it can be avoided?
Rayn: If you want to inject children with known toxic heavy metals, I believe the burden of proof for a reason is on you, Terrell. And, since thimerosal is used as a cost-cutting measure, not because it’s the best or healthiest substance for the job, I figured you’d explain why you want to put children at unnecessary risk to maximize profits for pharmaceutical companies.
Genaire: I don’t care for the byproduct of the aluminum industry fluoride being added to my water either so I go out of my way to by water that doesn’t have this included in it.
Rayn: “You go off about mercury in vaccines (hypocritical since you are an autistic-self advocate),” you say? How exactly is it hypocritical for me to see unnecessary use of mercury to cut financial corners as dangerous, Brian? Are you now falsely suggesting that I linked mercury to Autism? Because, I didn’t.
Terrell G.: Genaire, but the point is that it isn’t used any more. Children’s cuts are no longer routinely swabbed with mercury antiseptic. So if mercury is really so bad, there should be a benefit from that reduction in mercury exposure. So where is it? Seems like a simple question…
By the way it is fundamentally ignorant to claim that “even a trace amount of a poison is still a poison.” There are many, many substances that are a poison at one dose and benign of even essential to life at another. I’ve mentioned two: oxygen and water. Here’s another: potassium chloride. It is the very agent used for lethal injection. Yet if all of the potassium chloride were removed from your body, you would die instantly.
Yes, I know…science is complicated.
Genaire: The difference being what’s found in nature and what some guy in a lab coat injects into you. How many things at one point have been deemed safe only to later find out they are cancer causing?
Rayn: “But you still cling to your story and lash out at Terrell and myself for not being convinced,” you say, Brian? What exactly is my story, since you keep throwing out strawmen arguments, instead of presenting my ACTUAL position. And, how did I EVER “lash out” at you? By presenting my position, with no attacks against you, whatsoever. As for your friend, I only replied to his ad hominem attacks in kind.
Rayn: And, I’m still waiting for you to explain you suspect “kitchen” comment, Brian. I’m still eager to know what you meant.
Genaire: I have no one to blame if I’m poisoned by something find naturally in nature. I do have someone to blame if I’m poison from some dug given to me by some corporation that’s looking to increase its profit margin.
Terrell G.: Rayn, in the US, the consumer can choose to get the cheaper multidose flu vaccine with thimerosal preservative, or can get the more expensive single-dose preparation. Is it really so terrible to give the consumer the opportunity to save some money? I get the thimerosal stuff myself, because I know enough biology and chemistry to known that the tiny bit of mercury in the vaccine can make only a small percentage change in my body mercury burden (if one were really concerned about mercury, one could protect oneself better by avoiding tunafish than by avoiding a flu vaccination). So even if there is some risk of extraordinarily low concentrations of mercury (and there is no actual evidence of this), the amount in a vaccine would still contribute to that risk by only a fraction of a percent.
Rayn: “Is it really so terrible to give the consumer the opportunity to save some money?” So, NOW you admit that thimerosal is a cost-cutting measure, Terrell? Because, THAT was my REAL point on the issue of toxic vaccine ingredients, if you care to go back and read my words. For Brian to call it a conspiracy theory is fallacy. To try and frame my argument in terms and ideas I never said, that can easily be discredited, is pathetic.
Genaire: That’s great but the trouble with that is our government has been moving towards making all of these vaccinations mandatory. Nothing should be mandatory in a free society.
Rayn: I’m sorry to know that some people have developed such an unfounded faith in medical authorities – as I don’t suffer from such a dangerous delusion. Gerald Massey said it best, “They must find it difficult, those who have taken authority as truth, rather than truth as authority.” Either way, here’s some information that might make anyone reconsider such a strange position… or at least, take pause!
FDA Approved Vioxx Linked to Thousands of Deaths (27,000+ dead):
More Deaths Linked to FDA-Approved Diabetes Drug, Byetta:
FDA-Approved Avandia Linked to Hundreds of Deaths:
FDA-Approved Anemia Drug, Affyma, Recalled After Patient Deaths:
FDA-Approved Avelox Linked to “Sudden Death” – Hundreds of Victims:
FDA-Approved Yaz and Yasmin Deaths May Exceed 190 in United States Alone: Report
FDA-Approved Baycol Deaths Number 100 or More:
FDA Finds that the Drug They Approved, Zyprexa, Has Killed Thousands (3,400+ dead):
(update: archived copy of above link located here: http://web.archive.org/web/20120306192858/http://www.furiousseasons.com/archives/2008/11/fda_finds_zyprexa_has_killed_3400_people_worse_than_vioxx.html)
And, these represent only a FRACTION of the drugs “prescribed from an authorized physician” that subsequently resulted in the DEATHS of unsuspecting, doctor-and-FDA-trusting patients!
For those really interested, I could provide a much long list of such drugs, as well as a list of the many drugs that have resulted in birth defects in children, too!
Just remember that even OVER-THE-COUNTER NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), such as Aspirin and Tylenol, which are recommended by doctors as a long-term, daily treatment for arthritis, kill approximately 15,000-20,000 AMERICANS A YEAR! And, this is mostly due to the fact that prolonged use of these drugs can result in ulcers and bleeding within the gastro-intestinal tract of patients:
A word of advice: before blindly trusting in an “authorized physician,” I would suggest that everyone RESEARCH the side-effects, as well as any hidden “black box warnings” possibly attached to any drug that they, or their loved one, may be prescribed, BEFORE taking it! Otherwise, you might just be signing your own death-warrant! Critical thinking demands it!
Rayn: As for credentials, I opened no doors, Brian. You are opening them. It would seem that you hold your schooling in a very high regard, even over fact. But, since you’re so “interested” in my educational history, now, I will state for the record that I have a full background of studies in biology, including scientific training, and data analysis in the subject. Would you like for me to upload my transcripts from HS and college onto your page, so you can check out my course load, and my grades, and tell me if they meet your approval for my ability to discuss the topic of vaccines?
Rayn: I think I might even have some of the urinalysis and EKG analysis lab reports I did – even ones all the way back to HS – complete with grade, too, if you would like to view them, as well, Brian. Just let me know if you’re interested, and I’ll post them!
Rayn: I love how you can freely write on my page multiple times, Brian, when you disagree with my postings, but when I write on your page with my VERY FIRST disagreement EVER, I’m in a “kitchen,” and on a “soapbox,” spreading “propaganda.” So, what the HELL were you really doing, then, when you were debating with me on MY page? Using my posts as your personal kitchen, or soapbox, to spread propaganda? Trolling my wall? Either way, your hypocrisy is astonishing!
Here are two times that I specifically recall debating with you on my FB page, which I later added to my website:
Are Natural Rights Man-Made, or Are We Born With Them?
State-Run Programs for the Poor, or Individual Responsibility for Helping Those in Need?
In reality, my FB wall is my “soapbox,” along with my website, Brian. I don’t need your space to have an audience, because I have my own 500+ FB friends to share with, and many thousands who visit my page, yearly, based almost purely on keyword searches. As a matter of fact, I have severe anxiety about writing anything onto the FB wall of other individuals – especially things that could even remotely be misconstrued, or seen as controversial. I only wrote here based on the strong, repeated encouragement of Genaire, who said he was having a debate that I should join in on, considering my special interest in biology and medicine.
Terrell G.: Rayn, “admit” that multidose vaccines are a cost-cutting measure in the US? I said that from the beginning. I also said that they are far more than that in poorer countries where adequate refrigeration is hard to come by, because the preservative can make the difference between adequate vaccination and none. Which part of that did you find difficult to understand? Again, why is it so terrible to offer US consumers a cheaper option, if (like myself) they are savvy enough to know that the thimerosal preservative offers negligible (and likely zero) risk.
And I’m still waiting for you to answer my question: If these tiny traces of mercury are so dangerous, where is the health benefit from the great reduction in childhood mercury exposure? It is a simple, logical question. Yet every time I bring it up, you twist and squirm to avoid answering it.
Terrell G.: Rayn, some drugs can have dangerous side effects? Horrors! Who knew? Only those who read the label. And in other shocking news, automobiles sometimes crash and kill people–a lot more than are killed by the side effects of medications. But automobiles have benefits to balance the hazards. So do drugs–sometimes life-saving benefits. Hundreds of people a year die of allergic reactions to antibiotics. But before antibiotics, much greater numbers died from infections. I heard that some people at Merck who kept their personal stash of Vioxx after Merck took it off the market, even though the knew the risks. Why? Because for some people who cannot tolerate the bleeding risk of conventional aspirin like drugs, the alternative to the modest cardiovascular risk of Vioxx is living in constant pain or taking addictive narcotics.
Rayn: Actually, Terrell, I didn’t “twist and squirm” one bit. I haven’t answered you, because I’m still waiting for YOU to answer the question that I asked you LONG before you asked me one! Can you give me EVEN ONE GOOD REASON why should I show your inquiry any consideration while you BLATANTLY disregard mine? I’m sure I’ll be waiting a long time for that answer, too. Seems like you’re the one who twisting and squirming to avoid giving me a solid answer. The hypocrisy of this whole exchange runs DEEP, boy! Here… I’ll even remind you of what I asked: “I’d ask you to please show me a SINGLE study out there that explores the SYNERGISTIC TOXIC effects of simultaneously introducing ANY combination of mercury, formaldehyde and aluminum intravenously into the human body! I’ll wait…” And, as you can see, I’m STILL waiting, even while you pretend that my lack of reply to your question is anything but CAUSE AND EFFECT of your OWN ACTIONS!
Rayn: ” ‘Admit’ that multidose vaccines are a cost-cutting measure in the US? I said that from the beginning,” Terrell? No. It was I who mentioned from the beginning “the use of CHEAP, subpar, corner-cutting ingredients like formaldehyde, aluminum and mercury, in lieu of the more safe alternatives that are available.” I’m the one who introduced that fact into this exchange, and FIRST! Check your history, my man. You replied by addressing Genaire with, “In fact, mercury has been virtually eliminated from US vaccines over the years, although its elimination increases the cost of vaccination and (particularly in parts of the world where adequate refrigeration is not available) increases the risk of bacterial contamination. In the US, the mercury-containing antibacterial agent thimerosal is present only in multi dose fiu vaccines, and more expensive single-dose flu vaccines without thimerosal for those who are paranoid about mercury.” Now, how is that the same as ADMITTING that the use of mercury in vaccines is done as a cost-cutting measure? To even mention “bacterial contamination” gives your statement an imaginary scientific explanation for the presence of the heavy metal, as opposed to the real explanation, which is a purely financial one! And, to call the desire to avoid mercury in vaccines “paranoid” has the same such effect! Nothing about what you wrote really strikes at the heart of why mercury is added to vaccines. You just skated around the real issue, while my statement, which preceded yours, DIDN’T, and was very specific!
Rayn: “Some drugs can have dangerous side effects? Who knew? Only those who read the label,” you say, Terrell? Your sarcasm is amusing, but why not address the fact that these drugs were so dangerous, and the side-effects were so much more than the labels upon them claimed, and at such higher rates for the ones that were listed, than labels claimed, that many of them were RECALLED!? Way to miss the point, my man! 😉
Brian K.: “To even mention “bacterial contamination” gives your statement an imaginary scientific explanation for the presence of the heavy metal, as opposed to the real explanation, which is a purely financial one!”
And this is why your argument has no credibility. You sarcastically dismiss bacterial contamination, a VERY real/observable phenomenon that has killed millions of humans throughout the ages and is the impetus for all forms of hygiene, in favor of pure *speculation* of financial motive.
Rayn: Nope. Brian. I dismiss using MERCURY to do such a thing, when there are SAFER ALTERNATIVES. Get your facts straight! Stop trying to frame my argument into what you’re used to expecting in a debate. Such methods will get you NOWHERE with me! By the way, what was the “kitchen” comment about?
Rayn: And, where are those ad hominem attacks you FALSELY accused me of writing, too?
Rayn: And, why do you get to disagree on my page multiple times, and when I do so only ONCE on yours, I’m on a soapbox, or in a kitchen, spreading propaganda?
Darren F.: Irrespective of one’s position, the fact remains that they save more people than they harm. There is currently a large outbreak of measles in wales with one reported death. This is obviously linked to the discredited link between the m.m.r vaccine and autism and the resulting unwillingness on the part of some parents to “risk” their children’s health… That is the definition of irony.
Rayn: Tell that touching story about saving humanity to all those who developed Narcolepsy, Guillain-Barré or straight up died from taking a vaccine, Darren (as I pointed out with links in my initial comments, here)! Those who believe that they have a right to cripple and kill others because their forced-on-the-population “medical treatment” will “save more people than… harm,” while the “harm” being inflicted is mostly upon THE SICK – are really just promoting another form of eugenics – once again, wrapped up in scientific jargon, of course, and once again, pushed almost exclusively through use of the medical community! Call me crazy, but I am simply unwilling to do the sort of “grisly math” that it takes to protect the “greater good” of humanity at the expense of “the few.”
Rayn: In case you didn’t read any of my earlier comments, Darren, I’ll quickly note what I already stated above, after providing some important links exposing the dangers of certain vaccinations, and of over-vaccination – so that my position misinterpreted: “these examples are a harsh reminder that vaccines should only be recommended for use against the MOST DEADLY or MOST DESTRUCTIVE VIRUSES, and ONLY DURING AN ACTUAL or IMMINENTLY EMERGING PANDEMIC! To do anything outside of these medical guidelines is almost guaranteed to be POLITICALLY or FINANCIALLY motivated! And, history shows that giving out flu vaccinations to the public when there is no real threat taking place is just a recipe for human calamity!”
In the face of a real pathogenic threat (meaning, easily transmittable and reaching pandemic proportions), the vast majority of the public will willingly line up to get vaccinated when given ALL of the facts about the probability of actually catching disease, the risks to health (along with probabilities), and the risks associated with the vaccination (along with probabilities). This is because GOOD ideas don’t require force!
Darren F.: For each that suffered a thousand didn’t. Would it make them less inflicted if everyone joined them? Your argument is illogical. Unfortunately, it is often the case that life has a cold eye. In other words, life’s a bitch, get over it and stop living in could have, would have, should have land.
Darren F.: Also, i’m english. Our government stated that the m.m.r will save our n.h.s money so i don’t see why you think that issue is a big conspiracy? If people here wish to have them separately then they can pay to do so. Medically, however, it is irrelevant to the majority of the general public.
Darren F.: I’ll give you an example.. A man watching a baseball match is hit on the head with a baseball. He dies. According to your logic, baseball should then be banned. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Genaire: Darren and the rest of you we have not in anyway discounted vaccines use in society. As I mentioned earlier I am a former serviceman who served overseas I was given a battery of vaccinations all of which I welcomed. Our point is each year they market the importance of these vaccinations by exaggerating the said disease to further market these vaccinations. They use additives such as mercury which is a toxic heavy medal to further increase there profit margins when safer alternative should be the only choice. As we all know in most cases proper nutrition and exercise goes a long way in the prevention of some of these ailments yet the pharmaceutical industry like other industry goes above and beyond to push this year’s product. Now from this I know you will falsely assume that I’m antivaccination and nothing can be further from the truth. I personally feel that when the stated side effects are worse then the symptoms of the disease said medicine is to treat the use of that particular medication needs to be rethought.
Darren F.: I agree with the fact that large pharmaceutical companies can be unethical in their quest for profit.
Darren F.: But scaremongering helps no one.
Darren F.: You need to be more pragmatic.
Rayn: There’s nothing illogical about my argument, Darren. I embrace Individual sovereignty, and recognize that I own myself, just like everybody else. Therefore, nobody has a right to force a vaccination onto me against my will, and I have no right to force one onto them. And, I cannot outsource abilities that I do not actually have for myself to any government authority, nor can any one or group do so, either. But, out of curiosity, I must inquire how you can ask me, “would it make them less inflicted if everyone joined them?,” which is most definitely a “COULD HAVE,” while at the same time, telling me to stop living in the “could have”? I fail to see your logic in writing those things, especially side-by-side, like that…
Aside from this, I never made any conspiracy, big or small, out of MMR vaccinations. That’s a strawman argument. You can attack it, but it is NOT my position on the issue! That seems to be the thing to do, here on this post. There have been repeated attempts by a number of parties to frame my argument into terms and points that are very manageable, and easily disproved, rather than to read my actual position on the matter, which is a VERY VALID one, regardless of whether I am deemed an “antivaccine crank” – which I am actually not (though, no one here seems to care much about facts). It almost seems as if it’s easier for those commenting against me here to disprove the cookie-cutter positions that can be searched out on google, with both sides of the debate laid out, than to listen to an organic individual viewpoint, that might not show up in the top searches on the internet, with corresponding thought-free replies, ready to be cut and paste, or tweaked enough to appear as though original.
Finally, my logic would NEVER dictate that baseball be banned if someone were to die during a game. I don’t see how you reach that conclusion at all. To begin with, I am a Voluntaryist, rejecting all forms of coercion against the innocent, and I view government compulsion of the public as being a form of such. Besides this, I never even said that vaccines should be banned. That appears to be another straw man argument. Finally, even on the face value of your strange non sequitur analogy, I don’t understand how you are able to compare a voluntary sport, with voluntary fans, to an involuntary medical procedure. I just don’t get it…
Genaire: Darren scaremongering is a practice used by the pharmaceutical companies to push product. We have just started that safer additive should and can be used
Darren F.: I don’t dispute your right to believe that and if that is the case why mention it at all to others if you do not wish to influence them?
Terrell G.: Rayn, so the dodging, weaving, and deflection continues. As it happens, there has been a natural, ongoing experiment in whether mercury in vaccines has any sort of toxic effect, synergistic or otherwise. Exposure to mercury in vaccines has been massively reduced. If there is such an effect of mercury, then there should be a corresponding decrease in the incidence of that toxic effect. But there hasn’t been. Not autism, not Asperger’s, not ADHD. The mercury synergism hypothesis is therefore refuted. QED.
It is a dead hypothesis. It is not just pining for the fjords. It is an ex-hypothesis.
Darren F.: Rayn, the statement is not a could have. I’m pointing out that if someone dies because they have the m.m.r it wouldn’t help them if everyone else died also.
Darren F.: I’m not disputing your data but your interpretation of it and how it affects real life. At the end of the day, opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one and they are all, at times, full of shit lol 😉
Darren F.: In the u.k it is voluntary by the way…
Darren F.: I didn’t realise that in the u.s.a it isn’t. That i don’t agree with! Even though personally i think everyone should have it.
Genaire: Darren we only seek to get people thinking about the motivations of said companies. Terrell many medications and medical practices throughout the years have been deemed to be safe but as the years goes by the number of drugs no longer in use due to harmful side effects continues to mount: https://www.google.com/search?safe=images&client=ms-android-hms-tmobile-us&source=android-browser-suggest&hl=en-US&ei=dDh_UdmHMKbH0AG6moFo&q=discontinued+medications+list+due+to+side+harmful+side+effects&oq=discontinued+medications+list+due+to+side+harmful+side+effects&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.3…20024.49430.0.508188.8.131.52.0.0.0.5153.6658.3-1j0j2j9-1.4.0.chyp%2Ca%3D1%2Cb%3D100%2Cn%3D5%2Ct%3D2%2Cr%3D15%2Crequest_latlng%3Dtrue%2Cbase_dedup%3Dfalse..0.0…1c.1.11.mobile-gws-serp.QdB-Ku8n3Q0#itp=open0
Again I don’t sit here and call my self an expert nor do I seek to tell anyone else what they should be doing with there bodies. As Darren mentioned opinions are like assholes and I’m just stating my opinion.
Darren F.: I don’t think it does any good to second guess.. 80 years ago smoking was advertised as good for your health. We have the benefit of hindsight but what you are trying to do is almost prognosticate certain possibilities when in actual fact that isn’t applicable to how people live in the real world. Life has risk and people mst accept that and follow what is generally accepted or there would be no concensus..
Terrell G.: Genaire, it is certainly true that drugs can be tested on a limited number of people, so it is possible that safety testing may miss rare but serious adverse reactions, as in some examples you cite. It is wise not to be too hasty to start taking a new drug unless the benefits over established drugs are clear, as post-marketing surveillance or new studies may occasionally yield new information that alters medical opinion about the benefit/risk ratio of a drug. Nevertheless, decisions based upon the best current scientific evidence are far more likely to be correct than a random guess or (as in the case of antivaccination hysteria) a prejudice.
Keep in mind also that none of this applies to current vaccines, which have been in use long enough that their safety is quite clear. Overall, vaccines have proved to be among the safest therapies available, and the vaccines in current use protect against diseases that themselves carry major risks, both to oneself and to others.
Darren F.: I would rather take them and either be ok or ill than not take them and be definitely ill. It’s a no brainer…
Terrell G.: Darren, vaccination is indeed voluntary in the US. However, it may be required to do certain things such as attend public school or treat patients, where failure to be vaccinated may pose a danger to others.
Darren F.: Lol in other words.. Take them or be a hermit. If everyone else has had it then why would it matter. America is weird.
Darren F.: You should just do what we do in england.. Have it or don’t but if you die it’s your own fault.. I’m sure we invented it anyway.. I know we invented immunisation…
Terrel G.: Like pretty much everything else, vaccines are not perfectly effective. A vaccine reduces, but does not completely eliminate, the risk of infection for an individual. A big part of the public health benefit of vaccination is due to “herd immunity.” If the number of people infected by an individual is reduced sufficiently such that infected people recover (or die) faster than new people become infected, then an epidemic cannot propagate through the population even if introduced, and will rapidly peter out. This works only if most people are vaccinated. On top of that, there are some people who are unable to get vaccinated due to immune deficiency or other illness (e.g. mitochondrial disorders). These people are at particularly high risk from infectious diseases, and are completely dependent upon the vaccination of others for their safety.
Genaire: Darren I would have to disagree. I feel if more people would have question the safety of cigarettes when introduced we would have had less smokers today. This goes hand in hand with my main point: The corporations in a rush for profit have been known to push substandard unsafe products to market. I feel that people have the right to kill themselves taking whatever product they like just as long as the dangers of said product are introduced right from the start (especially in the case of medicines).
Terrell as I said prior I’m not against vaccinations, I myself have been heavily vaccinated due to my military service. My issue is not with vaccinations but with the market tactics used by these companies and the addition of toxic additives when safer more natural ones should always be the goal (again when talking of medications). I don’t feel that vaccinations should ever been mandatory. If you are vaccinated and I’m not I should pose no risk to you if I was too contact the vaccinated illness.
Terrell G.: The notion that pharmaceutical companies are putting “toxic additives” into vaccines when safer “more natural” (a scientifically meaningless term) substances could be used is also false. In fact, there is zero evidence that any of the additives currently in vaccines are toxic at the minuscule doses used, and I can’t help noticing that you have not suggested any “more natural” substitutes. What is a “more natural” additive than thimerosal to prevent multidose vaccines from being subject to bacterial contamination that would make people ill? What is “more natural” adjuvant than aluminum (and how could anything be more natural than the 3rd most common element on earth?). What is a “more natural” inactivating agent than formaldehyde, a simple molecule that is produced naturally within the body in amounts far greater than found in vaccines?
Genaire: Listen Terrell like most I don’t wish to ingest substances that could be considered toxic no matter the dosage. It’s my opinion and it’s an opinion held by many people that’s why people buy organic. The toxic chemicals spread on the foods may not be harmful at such low dosages but why ingest it if you don’t have to. It’s not a notion that mercury is poisonous it’s a fact and its not my job to find a safer alternative apparently it’s yours.
Terrell G.: Genaire, so despite all your talk of “safer, more natural” alternatives, you have no actual knowledge that any even exist. You just assume, based solely on your prejudice against the evil drug companies that whatever they use must be bad.
The fact that a lot of people believe something stupid does not make it any the less stupid. And it is stupid to divide the world up into “toxic chemicals” and “natural” substances. Wishful thinking aside, nature doesn’t work that way. To begin with, the most toxic substances known to man are all natural–indeed, every one on the CDC’s list of Select Agents–the most dangerous toxins known to man–is natural. And just about everything, including oxygen, water, and salt, is poisonous at some dose. Conversely, even very toxic substances are benign (or in some cases, healthful) at sufficiently low doses.
Genaire: What Addington Terrell? I can swallow a small amount of arsenic without any real immediate that but should I? Mercury has an accumulative affect on the system, why needlessly add additional to save some rich corporation some money?
Bit the scholar seeks proof? Here you go:
Genaire: You argue for the sake of arguing even when you have no real leg to stand on Terrell. Well I’m several years younger then you are we can go on as long as you like.
Genaire: Neurological Effects of Mercury Exposure:
Genaire: Let me explain it to you so even a child could understand it Terrell. Mercury Bad!
Terrell G.: Genaire, “let me explain it to you so even a child could understand it Terrell. Mercury Bad!”
Yes, that’s about the level of reasoning that I’m seeing here.
Genaire: I provided you links with a higher level of reasoning, since you seem to not understand that mercury has an accumulative effect on the body. Ingesting of any amount while it may not cause an immediate danger but I ask why poison yourself needlessly? And yes it is poison no matter the dose.
Terrell G.: Genaire, yes, metals such as mercury can accumulate–but only IF they are ingested at a greater rate than the body eliminates them. That’s basic pharmacokinetics. “The dose makes the poison.” That’s basic toxicology.
At sufficiently low doses, therefore, there is not appreciable accumulation. Otherwise, we’d all have mercury poisoning from eating tunafish, which is a far richer source of mercury (and in a more potently toxic chemical form, at that) than vaccines. That’s basic reasoning.
Genaire: You would figure someone with your educational background would know that mercury has an accumulative effect on the body but since you don’t I have provided the links you requested. If you would like more I can provide more. I’m actually in the middle of something but I’ll drop everything for you Terrell. Someone with your job title should know that mercury is poisonous so I would educate you before your research is allowed to hurt anyone.
Genaire: Mercury poisoning can be prevented (or minimized) by eliminating or reducing exposure to mercury and mercury compounds. To that end, many governments and private groups have made efforts to regulate heavily the use of mercury, or to issue advisories about its use. For example, the export from the European Union of mercury and some mercury compounds has been prohibited since 2010-03-15. The variability among regulations and advisories is at times confusing for the lay person as well as scientists.
Genaire: I find this really interesting:
That might explain why thimerosal was eliminated in many countries 20 years ago. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to ethylmercury, the form of mercury in thimerosal, suffered brain damage years later. Studies on thimerosal poisoning also describe tubular necrosis and nervous system injury, including obtundation, coma and death. As a result of these findings, Russia banned thimerosal from children’s vaccines in 1980. Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have also banned the preservative.
Brian K.: After all that talk of propaganda and financial motive you share links to a guy whose work failed peer review and peddles “vitamin” products (which have laxer safety standards than vaccines and prescription drugs). Along with a fake news site that trumps the blatantly false autism-vaccine hypothesis.
Genaire: I provided other links as well Brian Kinghorn. But I guess the other 20 countries that also refuse to use this addictive know a little more then you.
Terrell G.: Genaire, you don’t gain any credibility by citing quack sites. By the way, did it never occur to you that sites like naturalnews and mercola are basically advertisements crafted to hawk quack cures–so they depend for their livelihood on making their customers distrust science-based medicine? You talk about Big Pharm being for profit, but Big Supplements is where the real money is. Unlike pharmaceutical companies, they don’t have to spend billions on research to develop novel molecules or on clinical studies to prove their products are safe and effective. They don’t need to spend money on assays to verify that their products contain what is listed on the label at the claimed dose, because nobody checks and there is no penalty for getting it wrong. All they have to do is to remember to include the Quack Miranda Warning: “These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.”
Brian is pointing you in the right direction. Instead of quack nutriceutical web sites, try reading the real scientific literature, much of which is available for free through PubMed
Genaire: Brian, I love how you jump on the one link you think you can find fault in. 20 countries refuse to use it that speaks volumes.
Genaire: What about quack countries Terrell or is it not true that these countries refuse to use this agent?
Genaire: But I guess the two of you are smarter then the scientist of these nations.
Terrell G.: So let’s get back to the question I asked before: If thimerosal is so dreadfully toxic, where is the evidence of a health benefit from the reducing thimerosal exposure? As you point out, multiple countries have reduced exposure to thimerosal. So there ought to be abundant evidence of benefit. It’s a simple question, a simple test of the hypothesis that thimerosal is harmful at the low doses that were used to protect vaccines from bacterial contamination. So where is the evidence? Has autism declined in those countries? Asperger’s? ADHD? Anything?
Do I hear crickets chirping?
Genaire: “In the United States, countries in the European Union and a few other affluent countries, thiomersal is no longer used as a preservative in routine childhood vaccination schedules.”
Genaire: I’m referring to the accumulative synergistic effect of this medal on the body. As I mentioned before arsenic in small doses won’t kill me but several small doses and I’ll be pushing daisies rather quickly.
Genaire: No crickets chirping here we can do this as long as the two of you like.
Brian K.: Are you admitting that Terrell and I are scientists and that you are not? You are reading the summaries/reports of policy and decisions made by non-scientists. Such opinions and recommendations should be based on sound evidence but are not evidence themselves.
You’ve repeatedly rejected the fundamental tenets of toxicity being a phenomenon of dose and metabolism. This is all pointless if we can’t agree on the fundamental nature of biology, chemistry, or even the very definitions of “natural”, “toxin”, “poisonous”, etc.
Genaire: Don’t give me that Brian I don’t need to be a scientist to know mercury is harmful stick to your statistics.
Brian K.: Well as long as we are clear that you don’t care about rigorous analysis of empirical evidence. Stick to your dogma.
Genaire: No we are not clear. The 20 countries found an alternative and deemed it unsafe why can’t we?
Genaire: What we should be agreeing upon is the several studies that have been done that prove the toxicity of Mercury. Then as critical thinkers (which goes far beyond some two bit degree) that we don’t want this injected in our nor our children’s veins!
Terrell G.: Genaire, argument from authority doesn’t work so well when the people you are arguing with are themselves authorities. We don’t use that kind of argument much in academia, because everybody is an authority. Instead, we rely on logic, reasoning, and evidence. So repeating “Mercury is a TOXIN”!!! over and over just makes you sound foolish when you are talking to somebody who actually understands what toxicity is, now it works, and how substance are absorbed and eliminated in the body, and who knows that toxicity depends upon dose and frequency of exposure. Pointing out that other countries have eliminated thimerosal doesn’t carry much weight when you are talking to somebody who knows when and why it was eliminated. Indeed, at the time it was removed, the notion that thimerosal might cause some adverse effects, particularly in small children, did not seem implausible, particularly given the toxic potency of another form of mercury, methyl mercury (the form that you get from tunafish), and it seemed a reasonable precaution even though there was no actual evidence of any harm, and even though it would increase the costs to the consumer. But science marches on; it has now been several years since the use of thimerosal as a preservative in childhood vaccines was abandoned, and there is still no hint of any health benefit from its removal. There has also been study of the pharmacokinetics of thimerosal, and we now know that thimerosal is substantially more benign than methyl mercury, because it is eliminated much more rapidly from the body.
If you think there is a “safer” alternative to thimerosal for protecting patients from infection in multidose vaccines or when adequate refrigeration is unavailable or for inactivating viruses, then tell us what it is. My professional opinion is that reducing exposure to mercury is a reasonable thing to do, but we shouldn’t go crazy about it. As with everything in life, risks must be balanced with benefits. For adult multidose vaccines like the flu vaccine, for inactivation of infectious agents for preparation of a vaccine (which requires much smaller amounts of thimerosal), and for keeping patients safe from infection in parts of the world where reliable refrigeration is often unavailable, there still is no good alternative, and no rational reason to believe that it poses a risk.
Terrell G.: Genaire, so the answer to the question of whether I think I am “smarter than the scientists of those nations” that eliminated thimerosal is “no.” In their position, at that time, I would probably have made the same decision (although it is a close call, and there are scientists whom I respect who would disagree). But today, I know things that they did not, because I have the benefit of several more years of research, as well as the knowledge that the elimination of thimerosal preservative has yielded no detectable health benefit in the countries that did it. In one respect, it was probably a bad decision, because a decision that was made as a precaution in the absence of evidence has been misunderstood by the public (including yourself) as indicating that thimerosal had been shown to be harmful, which wasn’t true. And there is certainly no doubt that the vaccine fears that it encouraged have done more harm to the public–including children who died from vaccine-preventable diseases–than thimerosal ever did.
Genaire: Obviously they found an alternative they can live with. Am I saying the addition of thimerosal in the vaccination should stop people from taking the vaccination when an actual pandemic is at hand, no I would take it if I was faced with a real threat of death from not taking it. Again if an alternative to thimerosal can be used and its obvious that it can due to the other countries that use the alternative why not adopt that same practice? I highly doubt the residents of the E.U. have had an increase in deaths due to the discontinued use of said agent.
Genaire: With the number of medical recalls due to harmful side effects (after all these studies have been done) I will side with caution since all your scientific studies haven’t proven to be 100‰ accurate in the past. You call it foolish I call it intelligence.
Brian K.: You seem to agree it’s sensible to get vaccinated in the face of threats to your own health, but you neglect the fact that being infect-able poses a threat to other people. Even if you are healthy enough to fight infection (or at least suffer no symptoms) you can carry the virus and spread it to the more vulnerable, i.e. infants, elderly, immuno-comprised. Again, herd immunity.
Brian K.: Still, what is this safer alternative you speak of? Is it in any of your research or are you inferring they found some alternative which does not necessarily follow from the discontinued use of one agent. The fact is that many people are electing to not get vaccines due to fear/ignorance and now we are witnessing outbreaks of measles, whooping cough, etc. even in developed “1st-world” regions like U.S. and Europe.
Brian K.: “I will side with caution since all your scientific studies haven’t proven to be 100‰ accurate in the past. You call it foolish I call it intelligence.” ~ Genaire
This sentence is absurd and shows you don’t really understand what science is. Science is a rigorous, ongoing *process* by which we attempt to learn truth by empiric evidence (as opposed to politics/polemics which is truth by argument). It’s never 100% accurate. There is always uncertainty so we make probabilistic judgments that weigh the signal and noise.
“Science does not aim at establishing immutable truths and eternal dogmas; its aim is to approach the truth by successive approximations, without claiming that at any stage final and complete accuracy has been achieved.”
― Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays
Terrell G.: Genaire, yes, everybody wants to “side with caution” but you still need evidence and rational consideration to determine what is the most cautious course of action, so you can’t avoid having to make decisions in the absence of absolute certainty.
Is it really the most cautious action to remove a preservative with extremely strong evidence of safety (at the levels used in vaccines), knowing that the consequences are greater risk of bacterial contamination and greater cost and difficulty of distribution that will reduce the number of people who get vaccinated? You are trading off a risk that is almost certainly imaginary while accepting the near certainty of more disability and death from vaccine-preventable diseases (and perhaps even from bacterial contamination).
These are not easy decisions to make, and vilifying the people who make them, and insinuating, without evidence, that they are acting out of a profit motive instead of genuine concern for public health does not do anybody any good.
When I look at this list I don’t just see drugs that have been recalled, I see the mistakes that have been made, mistakes made by teams of scientist who was sure enough after all the studies and testings was done to mass release the product. I see 56 mistakes (that’s just the significant cases of recall) made by teams of scientist with strong evidence of there products safety being wrong. I see the countless lives that have been irrevocably changed due to men’s arrogance and greed. I see sons and daughters who lost there mothers and fathers. I see fathers and mothers who lost there sons and daughters.
In this case I see our capitalist system (profit based capitalist system) continue to push a product on to the people due to that products cost efficiency when 20 other nations have found an alternative that is not a known poison. I see arrogance and greed at it’s finest.
Terrell G.: Genaire, it sounds like you simply don’t understand the issues involved in drug safety testing. Logistically speaking, it is only practical to test a new drug on a few thousand people. On the one hand This is adequate to detect even moderately common adverse effects, but it will not reliably detect truly rare side effects that may only emerge when a drug is being used by millions of people. For example, a side effect with an incidence of 1 in 10,0000 patients might never be observed in a trial with 5,000 subjects. Yet if that drug is used by 10 million people, that would translate into 1000 cases. If that very rare side effect is very severe, it could lead to the drug being withdrawn. So the final stage of safety testing (sometimes known as Stage IV) is post-marketing surveillance. This is why it’s a good idea not to take a brand new drug unless you really need it, and the older drugs (for which safety in actual use is well established) are inadequate. This is simply a practical limitation of any kind safety testing. But your prejudice leads you to blame it on “arrogance” and “greed” and “our capitalist system.”
And no, it is not true that 20 other nations have found a “safer” alternative to thimerosal as you have repeatedly asserted. I was hoping to lead you to make this discovery yourself, but you clearly cannot be bothered to look up any information that does not fit with your biases. They are just doing without, just as we are (except for flu vaccine, which you can buy in a thimerosal free formulation if you really want it) and accepting the associated risks and disadvantages, which I’ve already discussed.
And lots of luck finding any substance that is not a “known poison.” Remember, oxygen, water, and salt are all known poisons at sufficiently high doses.
Genaire: I do understand and I do understand that it has proven itself inadequate time and time again. What I don’t understand is putting a known poison in the vaccinations just because it’s cheaper and the arrogance of the men that think it’s okay to do so.
Genaire: Listen you can put all the Mercury in the vaccinations you want don’t make it mandatory 1, make available a safer alternative 2, stop evading the public into believing that ever small outbreak is a pandemic 3.
Terrell G.: Genaire, OK, for the moment I’ll give up trying to explain why virtually every chemical is a “known poison,” since that is apparently beyond your ability to comprehend. So let’s talk about antibacterial agents. Why are they in vaccines? Because they provide an extra layer of protection against bacterial contamination that can produce fatal infections. Remember the recent problem with compounding pharmacies that killed a number of people? It was because they were a bit careless and got some bacteria into their injectable drugs. What does it mean for a substance to be antibacterial? Basically, it means that that substance is able to poison bacteria, which means that it interact with the components of a bacterial cell. But we share a common evolutionary ancestry with bacteria, so any substance that interacts with bacterial cells will probably interact with our cells at some dose. So anything that is antibacterial is a “known poison.” Nevertheless, it is possible to find some substances that kill bacteria but that do not do harm to human beings, particularly when diluted in the much greater volume (compared to the vaccine bottle) of the human body. Now it is possible to get away without using an antibacterial agent. You just have to be extra careful in preparing and handling your vaccines. So if you are more concerned that the drug company or the pharmacy might screw up and contaminate your vaccine with some bacteria that will cause you to die horribly, then you want the disinfectant. On the other hand, if you are more worried that the disinfectant that has been tested for decades and found to be safe at the levels actually used in vaccines will nevertheless do something bad to you, then you can spend extra and buy the vaccine that lacks disinfectant and is more expensive due to the extra trouble and handling restrictions necessary to (you hope) protect you from getting a bacterial infection. In the US, we have a choice.
There. Is that clear?
Genaire: Explain it to the 20 other countries that discontinued is use.
Genaire: I got that and I got the fact that any thing can be poisonous at certain levels. Mercury has an accumulative synergistic effect on the body and if I have to pay a bit more for better packaging and refrigeration methods so be it. Please note the more condescendingyou get with me the more adhesive I’ll get with you.
Rayn: “I don’t dispute your right to believe that and if that is the case why mention it at all to others if you do not wish to influence them,” you ask, Darren? Well, if by “it,” you refer to my warnings about the dangers of certain vaccinations, and certain vaccination ingredients: the answer is simple. Presenting individuals as much information as possible about a subject – both the pros, and the cons (I did BOTH, though my PROS were OUTRIGHT ignored by the other parties debating me, here) – helps us to make MORE INFORMED CHOICES! It’s really that simple. To “influence” someone into voluntarily making THEIR OWN DECISION through use of facts is NOT COERCION, whatsoever. And, just to be clear, I would NEVER advocate for a ban on vaccinations, nor did I EVEN IMPLY such a position! Yet, there have been many strawmen attempts to attribute this to me, simply because that is the position that those debating me are MORE COMFORTABLE WITH ATTACKING – rather than my ACTUAL VIEWPOINT, which just happens to be much more complicated than the black-and-white thinking that MANY are apparently so VERY USED TO! Just from the direction of this debate, alone, I am beginning to believe that so much of the “controversy” regarding vaccines really comes from the same such sort of “gut-reaction” responses as I’ve now witnessed here, along with the push to frame all debates on the topic into the false paradigm of “pro-vaccination” versus “anti-vaccination” – an activity that has taken CENTER STAGE, over the facts! Strangely, there appears to be no room in the minds of these two extremist groups for individuals to be somewhat pro-vaccination, while also somewhat anti-vaccination, and, they are FAR from interested in understanding the reasons behind viewpoints that don’t correspond 100% with their own. It’s ALL OR NOTHING in their minds. Both of these “sides” could use a lesson in respect, as well as THE RULES OF LOGICAL DEBATE!
Rayn: “So the dodging, weaving, and deflection continues,” Terrell? No. You’re the one that ignored my question for HOURS, while simultaneously demanding that I answer yours. Meanwhile, now that you have FINALLY answered my question, which was: “I’d ask you to please show me a SINGLE study out there that explores the SYNERGISTIC TOXIC effects of simultaneously introducing ANY combination of mercury, formaldehyde and aluminum intravenously into the human body,” the reason you stalled so long is APPARENT. As I expected, THERE IS NO STUDIES! With all of the replies you have written, posturing as though there is a valid scientific reason behind the use of mercury (as opposed to it being added simply to cut corners), when pressed for some real answers (not questions YOU frame on the issue), you FINALLY state that there is “a natural, ongoing experiment in whether mercury in vaccines has any sort of toxic effect, synergistic or otherwise.” This represents EXACTLY the point I was trying to make in even asking my question in the first place! After decades of vaccinating populations with mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde-based ingredients, WHY was there NEVER EVEN ONE study done on the effects of such chemical cocktails PRIOR to the engagement of this wide-spread practice (let alone A FEW)? Failing to do so is evidence that SCIENCE has, for a long time, taken a back-seat to corner-cutting for profit, in the vaccine industry.
And, NOW that you have FINALLY answered my question, I will answer yours, because THAT’S how a real debate works! You asked, ” if these tiny traces of mercury are so dangerous, where is the health benefit from the great reduction in childhood mercury exposure?” To begin, you present a LOADED QUESTION that completely side-steps the facts at hand! Even with mercury being eliminated from many childhood vaccinations, it has been STEADILY INCREASING in our environment, and in our bodies, year by year:
Exposure to Mercury is Increasing and Cumulative:
“Yes, I know…science is complicated,” just like you said (but, don’t appear to actual adhere to, considering your question to me)… and, LIFE is complicated, too, for that matter! You see, human beings ARE NOT lab rats, living in the tidy ease of a CONTROL SETTING, with environmental factors being introduced one at a time! Instead, we are contending with MANY different factors, all at once! The virtual removal of ONE PARTICULAR SOURCE of mercury has, so far, not yielded “the great reduction in childhood mercury exposure,” because there are many more sources not only continuing to contaminate our environment, but also, steadily increasingly doing so – so OF COURSE, there are no real benefits to speak of!
And, as environmental exposure to mercury continues to increase for life on this planet, so does our SUBSEQUENT NEED TO AVOID AS MANY sources of the heavy metal toxin as possible! Now, while you may claim that “the amount of mercury that enters the bloodstream from vaccinations is much less than enters the bloodstream from dietary sources, and dietary mercury (methyl mercury) is also a more harmful form of mercury,” the effects of mercury exposure are CUMULATIVE! Understand? CUMULATIVE! I’ll say it again: CUMULATIVE! Therefore, the main goal for individuals, humanity, and science, should be to REDUCE EXPOSURE as MUCH AS POSSIBLE, not to SHRUG IT OFF as negligible! To point out other sources of mercury exposure only really adds more credence to MY POINT! Besides, why not ask ourselves HOW mercury has entered into fish, in the first place? The answer is clear:
How Does Mercury Get Into Fish:
According to the article, “When power plants use coal to produce electricity, mercury is emitted into the air. This accounts for 40 percent of the mercury in the Earth’s environment. When it rains, the mercury in the air falls into lakes, rivers and oceans. Bacteria in these bodies of water convert the mercury into methylmercury, which is easily absorbed into small organisms. Small fish ingest it when they eat those tiny organisms, and bigger fish eat the smaller fish. As bigger fish eat more organisms than small fish, they end up ingesting more methylmercury.”
As you can read for yourself, mercury is mainly contaminating fish due to the big business of the COAL INDUSTRY! And, this factor, alone, also accounts for ALMOST HALF of the mercury contaminating our environment, in the first place! Therefore, it is meaningless to use mercury in fish as a reason for why mercury in vaccines should be embraced. It is not a naturally-occuring element within fish, and we haven’t been engaging in the practice of eating mercury from that source for any lenthy period of time! The mercury contaminating fish is a very recent change to our environment, as far as science and nature are concerned!
With this established, why not ask how the EPA spent YEARS declaring coal burning as “safe” and “clean energy”? Of course, this is the same EPA that declared the air quality at Ground Zero to be “safe” after 9/11, upon doing “studies” and “research”:
EPA Misled Public on 9/11 Pollution, White House Ordered False Assurances on Air Quality:
(Oh, no! It’s a CONSPIRACY! No need to waste time reviewing the facts! Must be a lie!)
Obviously, the EPA is POLITICALLY-MOTIVATED, not SCIENTIFICALLY, and is therefore, NOT TO BE TRUSTED! And, I can show you MANY MORE REASONS WHY this is true, BEYOND the two examples I have just provided!
Rayn: Now, I would suggest you read this article, Terrell, entitled “Mercury Exposure and Children’s Health,” and taken right from the “National Center for Biotechnology Information’s” government website:
Here is a quote from the abstract, “Acute or chronic mercury exposure can cause adverse effects during any period of development. MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE. Ideally, neither children nor adults should have any mercury in their bodies because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning […] Mercury exposure can cause acute and chronic intoxication at low levels of exposure. Mercury is neuro-, nephro-, and immunotoxic. The development of the child in utero and early in life is at particular risk. Mercury is ubiquitous and persistent. Mercury is a global pollutant, bio-accumulating, mainly through the aquatic food chain, resulting in a serious health hazard for children…”
Upon reading the above information, it should now be VERY CLEAR why I stated earlier, Terrell that “if you want to inject children with known toxic heavy metals, I believe the BURDEN OF PROOF FOR A REASON IS ON YOU.” I also stated multiple times that there are SAFER ALTERNATIVES. This fact is TRUE, even as you claim that it is not (and, I will explain it, soon enough)! And, now, I will not only show you HOW, but I will show you WHY the whole premise of your argument for the addition of mercury-based ingredients is PURELY an argument for VACCINE MANUFACTURERS and BUYERS to make MORE MONEY at the expense of human health!
As you *somewhat* admitted yourself (though, disingenuously, and without ALL of the details), and is also stated on a number of websites explaining the issue, “Thimerosal and other mercury containing preservatives increase shelf life and lower costs by preventing ‘spoilage.’ They are used in vaccines to prevent microbial growth in the event that the vaccine is accidentally contaminated, as could occur with repeated puncture of multi-dose vials, commonly in use.” There you have it, Terrell. You are, in essence, arguing for the use of a PRESERVATIVE that is added solely to enable companies and medics to store an ALREADY-FUNCTIONING product for LONGER, while also enabling them to use it in larger BULK! This is because it allows medical personnel to BREAK THE SEAL on a new MULTI-DOSE bottle of vaccine – which THEN, AND ONLY THEN, requires the “REFRIGERATION” you once mentioned (sans the all-important reason, of course) – and, still use it again, later! It is as I have already tried to explain multiple times: the practice of adding thimerasol to vaccines is NOT based in the medical science of health; it is based in the economic science of profit-making!
(Do not mistake this situation with the oral polio vaccine [no longer used in the US], which IS refrigerated in advance of opening, and does NOT contain mercury!)
Perhaps, now you can FINALLY understand that very HEALTHIEST and SAFEST ALTERNATIVE to adding mercury into vaccines is for manufacturers to DO AWAY WITH MULTI-DOSE VACCINES, ALTOGETHER – and, stick with their SINGLE-DOSE products! While they’re doing this, medical administrators could learn to work with an earlier expiration date on the vaccines they purchase, and order supplies, accordingly! These two measures would work better than ANY SUBSTITUTE INGREDIENT for mercury, and they actually address the issue AT THE ROOT, while taking NOTHING for GRANTED! I choose to CRITICALLY THINK about this vaccine issue because that is what SCIENCE demands! I see no reason to allow vaccine companies make the CORE DECISIONS on the topic of vaccines, while I scramble to then tweaking the MINOR DETAILS of their choices, afterwards!
“If there is such an effect of mercury, then there should be a corresponding decrease in the incidence of that toxic effect. But there hasn’t been. Not autism, not Asperger’s, not ADHD,” you say, Terrell? Well, for one, there IS NO CONNECTION between AUTISM and VACCINATIONS, so your so-called point is a NON-POINT! Secondly, MERCURY EXPOSURE IS STILL ON THE RISE, as I noted above, so your once-again presumptuous LOGIC IS CRITICALLY FLAWED. I find it RATHER INTERESTING that you somehow managed to overlook (or ignore, possibly?) one of THE MOST BASIC and IMPORTANT FACTS on the subject of mercury exposure, Mr. Scientist! Hats off to you!
Terrell G.: Rayn, Thank you for finally acknowledging what I’ve been trying to tell you–than the amount of mercury in a vaccination is so tiny compared to environmental exposure to methyl mercury (a far more toxic chemical form of mercury) that any risk to human health would be negligible–consistent with the failure to observe any benefit to human health from thimerosal removal from vaccines. In other words, if you are concerned about your mercury exposure, cut out tunafish, don’t worry about the vaccines. Given that the risk to human health from bacterial contamination of injectable medications is not at all negligible (witness the recent series of deaths from bacterial contamination due to careless handling of injectable drugs by compounding pharmacies), there is a very reasonable argument for the use of thimerosal, in that it carries negligible risk on its own, and protects against a much greater hazard.
Rayn: “Thank you for finally acknowledging what I’ve been trying to tell you–than the amount of mercury in a vaccination is so tiny compared to environmental exposure to methyl mercury (a far more toxic chemical form of mercury) that any risk to human health would be negligible,” you say, Terrell? HUH? I acknowledge NO SUCH THING, and you have entirely MISSED (or ignored) MY POINT! I NEVER said that “the risk to human health would be negligible.” What I said was, “NOT to SHRUG [mercury in vaccines] OFF as negligible” simply because (as you say), “the amount of mercury that enters the bloodstream from vaccinations is much less than enters the bloodstream from dietary sources”! Please read my words MORE CAREFULLY in order to avoid any CONFUSION as to my meaning, and my position on this issue!
To quote the entire portion of what I said in my last set of comments, for even FURTHER CLARITY as to my meaning: “the effects of mercury exposure are CUMULATIVE! Understand? CUMULATIVE! I’ll say it again: CUMULATIVE! Therefore, the main goal for individuals, humanity, and science, should be to REDUCE EXPOSURE as MUCH AS POSSIBLE, not to SHRUG IT OFF as negligible!”
Once again, I would suggest you read the article, “Mercury Exposure and Children’s Health,” taken right from the “National Center for Biotechnology Information’s” US government website:
And, again, here is a quote from the abstract, “Acute or chronic mercury exposure can cause adverse effects during any period of development. MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE. Ideally, neither children nor adults should have any mercury in their bodies because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning […] Mercury exposure can cause acute and chronic intoxication at low levels of exposure. Mercury is neuro-, nephro-, and immunotoxic. The development of the child in utero and early in life is at particular risk. Mercury is ubiquitous and persistent. Mercury is a global pollutant, bio-accumulating, mainly through the aquatic food chain, resulting in a serious health hazard for children…”
You continue to claim that there has been “a failure to observe any benefit to human health from thimerosal removal from vaccines,” and yet, there has really ONLY been a “failure to observe any benefit to human health FROM thimerisol,” considering the fact that “MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE […] neither children nor adults should have any mercury in their bodies because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS” (as stated in the article above, as well as my previous set of comments). Besides this, as I have also ALREADY stated in my last set of comments:
“Even with mercury being eliminated from many childhood vaccinations, it has been STEADILY INCREASING in our environment, and in our bodies, year by year:
Exposure to Mercury is Increasing and Cumulative:
‘Yes, I know…science is complicated,’ just like you said (but, don’t appear to actual adhere to, considering your question to me)… and, LIFE is complicated, too, for that matter! You see, human beings ARE NOT lab rats, living in the tidy ease of a CONTROL SETTING, with environmental factors being introduced one at a time! Instead, we are contending with MANY different factors, all at once! The virtual removal of ONE PARTICULAR SOURCE of mercury has, so far, not yielded “the great reduction in childhood mercury exposure,” because there are many more sources not only continuing to contaminate our environment, but also, steadily increasingly doing so – so OF COURSE, there are no real benefits to speak of!
And, as environmental exposure to mercury continues to increase for life on this planet, so does our SUBSEQUENT NEED TO AVOID AS MANY sources of the heavy metal toxin as possible!”
You claim, “if you are concerned about your mercury exposure, cut out tunafish, don’t worry about the vaccines.” Yet, if both sources contain MERCURY, then BOTH should be AVOIDED, even according to the GOVERNMENT-PUBLISHED STUDY ABOVE! Once again, I will quote it, to remind you, since you seem to be having trouble understanding: “MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE […] NEITHER CHILDREN NOR ADULTS SHOULD HAVE ANY MERCURY IN THEIR BODIES because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS”! Oh, and, just so you know, while I appreciate your dietary advice, I’m a strict vegetarian, and don’t eat tuna fish!
As for your statement, “given that the risk to human health from bacterial contamination of injectable medications is not at all negligible (witness the recent series of deaths from bacterial contamination due to careless handling of injectable drugs by compounding pharmacies), there is a very reasonable argument for the use of thimerosal, in that it carries negligible risk on its own, and protects against a much greater hazard,” please providesome reference article links, so that I can learn all of the details involved in such cases, to understand EXACTLY HOW such situations have to do with the use of thimerosal in VACCINES. Until then, I am unable to perceive what a situation involving (what appears to be) simple HUMAN ERROR regarding “injectable medications,” along with your HYPOTHETICAL scenario about “solving” it through the use of thimerasol, has ANYTHING to do with the use of the mercury-based additive in vaccines, and the REASONS behind such use!
Until then, I will restate what I have already pointed out in my last set of comments, which your anecdotal story does not detract from in any way:
“You are, in essence, arguing for the use of a PRESERVATIVE that is added solely to enable companies and medics to store an ALREADY-FUNCTIONING product for LONGER, while also enabling them to use it in larger BULK! This is because it allows medical personnel to BREAK THE SEAL on a new MULTI-DOSE bottle of vaccine – which THEN, AND ONLY THEN, requires the ‘REFRIGERATION’ you once mentioned (sans the all-important reason, of course) – and, still use it again, later! It is as I have already tried to explain multiple times: the practice of adding thimerasol to vaccines is NOT based in the medical science of health; it is based in the economic science of profit-making!
Perhaps, now you can FINALLY understand that very HEALTHIEST and SAFEST ALTERNATIVE to adding mercury into vaccines is for manufacturers to DO AWAY WITH MULTI-DOSE VACCINES, ALTOGETHER – and, stick with their SINGLE-DOSE products! While they’re doing this, medical administrators could learn to work with an earlier expiration date on the vaccines they purchase, and order supplies, accordingly! These two measures would work better than ANY SUBSTITUTE INGREDIENT for mercury, and they actually address the issue AT THE ROOT, while taking NOTHING for GRANTED! I choose to CRITICALLY THINK about this vaccine issue because that is what SCIENCE demands! I see no reason to allow vaccine companies make the CORE DECISIONS on the topic of vaccines, while I scramble to then tweaking the MINOR DETAILS of their choices, afterwards!”
Terrell G.: Typing “CUMULATIVE” in all caps doesn’t make it more scary, because I understand what it means. In toxicology, the question is, “cumulative to what level?” That depends upon dose, frequency of exposure, and rate of elimination (which differs for different chemical forms of mercury). If the little extra bit of mercury in vaccines was causing additional accumulation of mercury to a clinically significant level, then there would be clear health benefits in countries that have eliminated or mostly eliminated the use of thimerosal in vaccines. Only there isn’t.
So feel free to go to great lengths mto avoid mercury. Have your fillings removed, stop eating seafood, and dose yourself with chelating agents (which have their own toxicity to worry about) and perhaps you might reduce your mercury level to the extent that whether or not your vaccine uses thimerosal could possibly make a difference. Personally, I don’t plan on doing any of those things. Like most scientists and health professionals, I’ll continue to get the multi-dose flu vaccine because it is more economical, and because I’m more concerned about the risk of bacterial contamination that that of a tiny bit of a rapidly eliminated form of mercury. After all, I do lots of risky things. I expect, later today, to cross the street, which undoubtedly carries risks much greater than thimerosal in my flu vaccine.
And you’re going to have a hard time convincing me that the pharmaceutical companies are horribly evil for allowing me to make the decision for myself as to whether to use the standard multidose vaccine or pay extra for single dose, when I could undoubtedly protect myself to a greater extent by taking the money I save and using it to have dinner delivered instead of taking the risk of driving to the grocery store.
Rayn: “Typing ‘CUMULATIVE’ in all caps doesn’t make it more scary,” you say, Terrell? Well, it’s a GOOD THING, then, since motivation of fear was the FURTHEST thing from my intention! In REALITY, I simply used caps for EMPHASIS, since Facebook doesn’t have an easily-usable ITALICIZE feature!
Meanwhile, if you really did “understand what it means” when I wrote, “CUMULATIVE,” then you wouldn’t make the claim that “the amount of mercury that enters the bloodstream from vaccinations is much less than enters the bloodstream from dietary sources,” as though such information actually qualifies as a valid scientific reason for individuals to expose themselves to ANY amount of mercury, whatsoever!
Once again, I would suggest you read the article, “Mercury Exposure and Children’s Health,” taken right from the “National Center for Biotechnology Information’s” US government website:
And, for a third time, here is a quote from the abstract, “Acute or chronic mercury exposure can cause adverse effects during any period of development. MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE. Ideally, NEITHER CHILDREN NOR ADULTS SHOULD HAVE ANY MERCURY IN THEIR BODIES because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning […] Mercury exposure can cause acute and chronic intoxication at low levels of exposure. Mercury is neuro-, nephro-, and immunotoxic. The development of the child in utero and early in life is at particular risk. Mercury is ubiquitous and persistent. Mercury is a global pollutant, bio-accumulating, mainly through the aquatic food chain, resulting in a serious health hazard for children…”
“If the little extra bit of mercury in vaccines was causing additional accumulation of mercury to a clinically significant level, then there would be clear health benefits in countries that have eliminated or mostly eliminated the use of thimerosal in vaccines. Only there isn’t,” you say? Well, that’s not a very scientific conclusion, considering the fact that, “even with mercury being eliminated from many childhood vaccinations, it has been STEADILY INCREASING in our environment, and in our bodies, year by year,” as I have already pointed out! And, this is happening all over the world, not just in the US!
New UN Environment Studies Show Rising Mercury Threat to People in Developing Countries:
84% of Fish Contaminated by Mercury, Study Finds:
Study Finds High-Fructose Corn Syrup Contains Mercury:
As I previously noted, “‘yes, I know…science is complicated,’ just like you said (but, don’t appear to actual adhere to, considering your question to me)… and, LIFE is complicated, too, for that matter! You see, human beings ARE NOT lab rats, living in the tidy ease of a CONTROL SETTING, with environmental factors being introduced one at a time! Instead, we are contending with MANY different factors, all at once! The virtual removal of ONE PARTICULAR SOURCE of mercury has, so far, not yielded ‘the great reduction in childhood mercury exposure,’ because there are many more sources not only continuing to contaminate our environment, but also, steadily increasingly dpoing so – so OF COURSE, there are no real benefits to speak of!
And, as environmental exposure to mercury continues to increase for life on this planet, so does our SUBSEQUENT NEED TO AVOID AS MANY sources of the heavy metal toxin as possible.”
Rayn: “So feel free to go to great lengths to avoid mercury,” you say, Terrel? Great! I’m glad that I have your support for my right to choose! 🙂
“Like most scientists and health professionals, I’ll continue to get the multi-dose flu vaccine,” you say? Awesome! 🙂 Go ahead! Take AS MANY FLU VACCINATIONS AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN, for as many years in a row as you possibly can! 🙂 That is your right to do! However, everyone else has the same right to make their OWN decision about whether or not they want to take the RISK of injecting mercury into THEIR own bodies – and, should be INFORMED about its presence, as well as the dangers associated with accumulation of mercury into the human body! No amount of claims about how small the amount of mercury contained within certain vaccines is compared to that of fish, and unsubstantiated claims that “there is no evidence whatsoever of any harm from the minuscule amount of thimerosal” (which pre-supposes that you somehow actually know mercury levels accumulating in the bodies of every other human being on Earth, anyway! Very unscientific!) can change this FACT! As I will continuously point out: “the effects of mercury exposure are CUMULATIVE!” And, of course, “MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE. Ideally, NEITHER CHILDREN NOR ADULTS SHOULD HAVE ANY MERCURY IN THEIR BODIES because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning.”
Meanwhile, when you point out how many “health professionals” are getting the shot, you should really keep in mind that it is MANDATORY in many states, and that non-compliance often results in termination of employment – which likely skews the real stats:
Hospitals Crack Down on Workers Who Refuse Flu Shots:
Mandatory Flu Shots Opposed by Some Health Care Workers:
Either way, at the end of the day, I’m STILL an individual, and my actions are based upon REASON, not CONSENSUS!
Terrell G.: Rayn, I probably should stop pointing out the flaws in your argument before you are utterly reduced to RAVING IN ALL CAPS, but I can’t resist reminding you that “hospital workers” is not synonymous with “health professionals.” Of course, it is perfectly reasonable to require hospital workers to be fully vaccinated. It would be perfectly reasonable even if there were significant risks to vaccination (which of course there aren’t). Hospitals are full of vulnerable people–people who are immunosuppressed due to illness or medication. People with HIV, on chemotherapy, on immunosuppressive drugs due to autoimmmune diseases or organ transplants, people with genetic immune deficiencies, not to mention people who are just so desperately ill that any additional health challenge could kill them. It is absolutely unconscionable for a hospital worker to subject these patients to risk by going to work unvaccinated. Hospitals are a risky place to work. They are full of sick people. You could catch something working around their people. Fortunately, the vast majority of health care workers are brave people who knowingly and willingly place themselves at personal risk in order to help people. Anybody not prepared to do this has no place in a medical profession. I’d say the same for anybody who works with small children, such as teachers.
BTW, at the hospital in the medical center where I work, workers are allowed to refuse the flu vaccine, but if they do so, they are required to wear a face mask at all times. Personally, I think this is too lax.
But not all biomedical workers work in hospitals. Most of us work in labs or private offices, and we choose to get vaccinated, not to protect our patients, but to protect ourselves, our friends, and our families. Anybody who spends time with biomedical workers and scientists knows that, overwhelmingly, they, and their families, are first in line to get vaccinated. And yes, that includes the ones who work at those nasty for-profit pharmaceutical companies.
Rayn: “I probably should stop pointing out the flaws in your argument,” you say, Terrell? LOL! A lofty claim, but I CHALLENGE YOU to back it up with even A SHRED of evidence! I’ll wait… 🙂
In the meantime, I will point out that you’ve only provided a total of FIVE articles out of the 64 cited in the comments section of this debate! And, only a mere TWO of them even have to do with the subject matter at hand, while NONE of them disprove ANYTHING I HAVE WRITTEN, HERE, IN ANY WAY!
Here they are (with order of appearance provided in parenthesis):
(24) Shill Gambit:
(25) The Dose Makes the Poison:
(48) Quack Miranda Warning:
(49) PubMed Database Search Link:
[Of course, in the interest of clarity, I’ll note that link (49) is just the database for looking up scientific articles, and not one, itself!]
As for the two articles that even did qualify as being on topic, your “Dose Makes the Poison” wiki article EVEN STATES, “however, there is no linear relationship and also more to chemical toxicity than the acute effects caused by short-term exposure. Relatively low doses of contaminants in water, food, and environment can already have significant chronic effects if there is a long-term exposure.”
And, this information is cited as coming from the following place:
The Dose Makes the Poison – or, Does It?
Of course, this is a PERFECT ILLUSTRATION of how your “Dose Makes the Poison” article simply VERIFIES EXACTLY what I have pointed out to you numerous times, but you have chosen to ignore, and CANNOT REFUTE with ANY DEGREE EVIDENCE, as yet:
“Acute or chronic mercury exposure can cause adverse effects during any period of development. MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE. Ideally, NEITHER CHILDREN NOR ADULTS SHOULD HAVE ANY MERCURY IN THEIR BODIES because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning […] Mercury exposure can cause acute and chronic intoxication at low levels of exposure. Mercury is neuro-, nephro-, and immunotoxic. The development of the child in utero and early in life is at particular risk. Mercury is ubiquitous and persistent. Mercury is a global pollutant, bio-accumulating, mainly through the aquatic food chain, resulting in a serious health hazard for children…”
Once again, I’ll state: “the effects of mercury exposure are CUMULATIVE! Understand? CUMULATIVE! I’ll say it again: CUMULATIVE! Therefore, the main goal for individuals, humanity, and science, should be to REDUCE EXPOSURE as MUCH AS POSSIBLE, not to SHRUG IT OFF as negligible!”
As for your “Thiomersal” wiki article, it also proves my point, right within the very beginning of the toxicology section, which states,”Thiomersal is very toxic by inhalation, ingestion, and in contact with skin (EC hazard symbol T+), with a danger of CUMULATIVE EFFECTS.”
Basically, you have provided NO EVIDENCE, whatsoever, to back your unsubstantiated claims! And, in keeping with this same tradition, your boy, Brian, only provided FOUR links, with a mere TWO of them actually on topic. And, of course, just like yours, neither of them disprove anything I’ve written, here, either! Is this the sort of “debate” style I should expect from scientists? It seems like a very intellectually lazy way to conduct one’s self during a disagreement about SCIENCE, especially when I have personally provided over 40 links, with six of them being directly to scientific studies, 16 of them from mainstream news sources, and two of them from government websites! In the interest of INTEGRITY and RESPECT, I would expect both of you to be doing the same thing as I have been doing here, since the very BEGINNING of my replies (where four of the six scientific studies I mentioned are located), as a pace-setter for this so-called “debate”! And, yet, this has been FAR from the case!
And, here are just a few of the other claims you made that were easily disproved:
(1) Your claim: “It is untrue that there is ‘STRONG CONNECTION between the HPV vaccine, Gardasil, and DEATH.’ FALSE!
Proof: Gardasil Is Probable Cause of Girls’ Deaths: Brain Histology Study:
(2) Your claim: “[Mercury] was removed from all childhood vaccines.” FALSE!
Proof: FDA – Vaccine Safety and Ingredients:
Let us not even get into your MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS to link mercury with AUTISM – a purely unsubstantiated claim – with no science to back it! And, while I was called “hypocritical” by Brian for being an Autistic Self Advocate, while also mentioning mercury in vaccines as neurotoxic, as though I had made ANY CONNECTION between vaccines and autism, his efforts were PURELY LAUGHABLE ! This is because, when I was interviewed to become the Director of the NJ chapter of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network by their leadership, I was SPECIFICALLY asked about the vaccination issue in relation to the Autistic Spectrum. My answer was as follows: “Vaccinations are full of neurotoxins, and are often over-used and unnecessary (HPV for boys, for example), but no science has linked them to the autistic spectrum, so it’s a non-issue, there.” The reply from leadership was, “/nod.” And, less than 12 HOURS LATER, I was APPROVED AS DIRECTOR BY THE ENTIRE BOARD OF ASAN! 🙂 It should also be noted that my answer DIRECTLY CORRESPONDS to the position I have provided during this “debate.”
“Before you are utterly reduced to RAVING IN ALL CAPS,” you say, Terrell? Try ACTUALLY READING what I wrote when you first made these bizarre claims, which was, “I simply used caps for EMPHASIS, since Facebook doesn’t have an easily-usable ITALICIZE feature!” Therefore, your comment is PURELY RIDICULOUS!
As for your claim, “‘hospital workers’ is not synonymous with ‘health professionals,” that is just a straw-man argument, since I never made such a claim. I simply pointed out that mandating flu shots in some states will likely SKEW STATISTICS! Nothing more, nothing less. But, since we’re on the topic, I’m curious about your claim, so would you please provide me with the statistics to prove it? It’s not even that I don’t believe it to be possible, NOR WOULD IT EVEN DETRACT FROM MY POINT, if it were true… I just don’t believe YOU at face value, since you are really just a stranger to me, and have already made a number of false statements, here, while providing ZERO evidence for the vast majority of your claims!
Terrell G.: One way to know your argument is in trouble is when the best citation that you can come up to support it is in a recently established open-access, web-only “journal” that has no track record for reliable peer review, and is not indexed in Medline.
Genaire: Terrell you haven’t provided any information to support your claim that Mercury isn’t harmful when taken in low doses. We have provided links to support the facts that Mercury has a cumulative/synergistic effect on the body and exposure should be reduced as much as possible. You seem to be trying to disprove our claims in hopes that it will win you the argument (it has not I assure you). If given enough evidence to support your claims I would rethink my views on the issue but this has not been the case. You even have gone as far as attempting to disprove Rayn’s arguments with a link that doesn’t in anyway reference any of the links she has provided. Shame on you!
Terrell G.: I offered evidence that the levels of mercury that were present in vaccines were not harmful–namely, in no country in which the use of mercury in vaccines was reduced is there any evidence of any health benefit. If you remove a harm, there should be a benefit. That’s elementary logic. And you have offered no refutation other than pointing out that there are other sources of mercury around. In other words, your counterargument boils down to “the additional harm from mercury in vaccines was not actually zero, just so negligible as to be undetectable.” I am perfectly willing to go along with negligible, since it is scientifically and statistically impossible to distinguish between an effect that is actually zero and one that is so negligible that it is undetectable.
“Acute or chronic mercury exposure can cause adverse effects during any period of development. Mercury is a highly toxic element; there is no known safe level of exposure.”
Genaire: “Mercury-Laden Vaccines Approved Because of Conflicts of Interest Both the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have potential conflicts of interest with the vaccine makers, as do doctors who work with the companies. In fact, policy decisions are made by physician advisory panels whose members are often tied financially to the drug companies they are regulating.”
Rayn: “One way to know your argument is in trouble is when the best citation that you can come up to support it is in a recently established open-access, web-only ‘journal’ that has no track record for reliable peer review, and is not indexed in Medline,” you say, Terrell? LOL! Man, oh, man! Wow! Have you SERIOUSLY already forgotten that it was YOU who specifically stated, in a previous comment, to “try reading the real scientific literature, much of which is available for free through PubMed” (after I had already provided multiple scientific studies, mind you)? Gotta say it one more time, more boldly: WOW! Way to be consistent, pal!
Again, I would suggest you ACTUALLY READ the SAME EXACT article I have already provided above, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, entitled “Mercury Exposure and Children’s Health” – this time, as taken right from the “National Center for Biotechnology Information’s” PubMed website:
Or, you can simply read it from the link I ORIGINALLY provided it from:
And, of course… once again, here is a quote from the abstract, “Acute or chronic mercury exposure can cause adverse effects during any period of development. MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE. Ideally, NEITHER CHILDREN NOR ADULTS SHOULD HAVE ANY MERCURY IN THEIR BODIES because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning […] Mercury exposure can cause acute and CHRONIC INTOXICATION at low levels of exposure. Mercury is neuro-, nephro-, and immunotoxic. The development of the child in utero and early in life is at particular risk. Mercury is ubiquitous and persistent. Mercury is a global pollutant, bio-accumulating, mainly through the aquatic food chain, resulting in a serious health hazard for children…”
Your weak efforts to attack the SOURCE of articles I have cited, instead of the actual information being provided, has 100% BACK-FIRED on you! And, meanwhile, poisoning the well and guilt by association fallacies are erroneous modes of reasoning, anyway!
Terrell G.: The article that I was talking about in the suspicious, recently established open-access journal “Pharmaceutical
“Unlike methylmercury, ethyl mercury does not accumulate in the fatty tissues of the body and is actively excreted via the gut. In 2006, the WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety concluded that there were no reasons to change current immunization practices”
By the way, you should no that “no known safe level” does not translate into “no level is safe.” All it means is that (for obvious ethical reasons) nobody has done the experiment of giving increasing levels of mercury to human beings until some of them started to show symptoms of mercury poisoning. From basic biochemistry, we can presume that a maximum safe level of mercury exits; we just don’t know what it is–although the absence of any detectable health benefit from a massive decrease in the use of thimerosal as a preservative in vaccines argues that the levels of exposure from vaccines were comfortably below that limit, whatever it is. Hence the conclusions of the WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety that there is no reason to change current practices.
Brian K.: It’s interesting the direction this “discussion” has taken. First it was an article I shared that talks about how anti-vaxxers make a lot of claims that turn out to be wrong. It’s not about fact-finding but rather mistrust in vaccinations (or medical establishments)
Then we end up debating the purpose and utility of vaccination. Throw in speculation of financial motives and denial of basic tenets of toxicology & epidemiology (i.e. herd immunity). You trumpet your personal philosophy and political values of personal sovereignty but that ignores the very real possibility that your choice of actions (or inaction) can bring harm to others if you carry/enable infections to spread through the populace.
Now we’re up to rhetoric and fear mongering with mercury. The fallacious autism-vaccine thing has creeped up a few times (the symptoms of mercury poisoning are quite different so I wonder why this still persists). Bose-O’Reilly et al. (2010), which you cited, warns of the dangers of chronic exposure in our environment, food, industry, etc.
I didn’t see anything about a so-called cumulative/
“One of these children, a 7-year-old boy (who also consumed mackerel), had a hair mercury level of 15 μg/g. After 32 weeks without fish in his diet, his hair mercury level was below 1 μg/g.83 Fish is a good dietary source of lean protein and omega-3 fatty acids and fish should be part of a healthy diet.”
I don’t know why they wrote in the abstract “[T]here is no known safe level of exposure.” There are thresholds set by the E.P.A. and W.H.O.:
“For methylmercury, the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization/
Rayn: As I already commented previously, Terrell, it is fallacy to attack the SOURCE of a cited article, in lieu of the actual information being provided within it. And, claiming that the study I cited is “based upon very shaky histology,” while providing no explanation of how you formulated such a conclusion is not scientific, nor is it logical! Provide details and evidence to support your claim!
Again, I would suggest you ACTUALLY READ the SAME EXACT article I have already provided above, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, entitled “Mercury Exposure and Children’s Health” – this time, as taken right from the “National Center for Biotechnology Information’s” PubMed website:
“Acute or chronic mercury exposure can cause adverse effects during any period of development. MERCURY IS A HIGHLY TOXIC ELEMENT; THERE IS NO KNOWN SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE. Ideally, NEITHER CHILDREN NOR ADULTS SHOULD HAVE ANY MERCURY IN THEIR BODIES because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning […] Mercury exposure can cause acute and CHRONIC INTOXICATION at low levels of exposure. Mercury is neuro-, nephro-, and immunotoxic. The development of the child in utero and early in life is at particular risk. Mercury is ubiquitous and persistent. Mercury is a global pollutant, bio-accumulatin
“Unlike methylmercury, ethyl mercury does not accumulate in the fatty tissues of the body and is actively excreted via the gut,” you claim, Terrel? There’s much more to the body than “fatty tissue,” and the fact that ethylmercury is “actively excreted from the gut” does not mean that it is not is not accumulating in the body!
Read the abstract of the following study, from your favorite place, PubMed:
Integrating Experimental (In Vitro and in Vivo) Neurotoxicity Studies of Low-Dose Thimerosal Relevant to Vaccines:
“Information extracted from studies indicates that: (a) activity of low doses of Thimerosal against isolated human and animal brain cells was found in all studies and is consistent with Hg neurotoxicity; (b) the neurotoxic effect of ethylmercury has not been studied with co-occurring adjuvant-Al in TCVs; (c) animal studies have shown that exposure to Thimerosal-Hg can lead to accumulation of inorganic Hg in brain, and that (d) doses relevant to TCV exposure possess the potential to affect human neuro-developme
As you can read for yourself, “animal studies have shown that exposure to Thimerosal-Hg can lead to accumulation of inorganic Hg in brain.” Also note that NO STUDIES have been done relating to the synergistic (or even the additive) neurotoxic effects of mercury-aluminu
“You should no that ‘no known safe level’ does not translate into ‘no level is safe’,” you say? As I have already pointed out, time and time again, the health hazards associated with exposure to mercury are CUMULATIVE, while the synergistic (as well as the additive) effects have NOT BEEN adequately explored! And, what we do know about mercury, in all of its forms, is that it is HIGHLY TOXIC in large doses, and induces cumulative neurotoxicity in chronic smaller doses! Besides this, as you can read above, “NEITHER CHILDREN NOR ADULTS SHOULD HAVE ANY MERCURY IN THEIR BODIES because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning.”
I suggest that you read the following study:
The Evidence for the Safety of Thiomersal in Newborn and Infant Vaccines (May 2004):
As you can read for yourself, in the conclusion of the abstract, “it is not possible to prove that thiomersal is completely safe – epidemiology can only quantify a risk, not prove its absence.”
Rayn: Brian, if “arguing with a fool proves there are two… (or in this case, 4),” then according to your OWN WORDS, you’re a “fool” for continuing to argue your points, here! LMAO! You owned yourself! And, keep in mind, that while you can refer to yourself however you like, and can be as hostile as you THINK you can GET AWAY WITH over the internet, I would TRULY LOVE to see you to call ME a “fool” to my face, or to Genaire’s, for that matter, Mr. Arm-Chair Gangsta (although I KNOW FOR CERTAIN that it will never actually happen)! In the meantime, I’ll continue not to resort to the initiation of ad hominem attacks, as I have done ALL ALONG, because the initiation of such hostility is just the sign of a WEAK ARGUMENT!
“We end up debating the purpose and utility of vaccination,” you say? Nope. That’s just how you have been attempting to frame the debate, because you’re more comfortable countering an “anti-vaxxer” position, than my real points. If you’ll recall, you and Terrell chose to discuss the purpose of vaccines, in response to Genaire’s question about why he’d want to get vaccinated when his own body can do the same thing in most cases, considering the side-effects, along with my comments about the dangers associated with the certain vaccines, certain vaccine ingredients, and certain vaccine protocols, and the financial motivations for ignorning such dangers. And, while you provided such information as though you were actually somehow addressing MY valid concerns, you were really just brushing them off, in favor of promoting your “greater good” (at the expense of the few/sick) ideology. Meanwhile, I have continued to state that there ARE actually some circumstances by which vaccinations would be effective and helpful, and I even repeated my point a number of times!
“You trumpet your personal philosophy and political values of personal sovereignty but that ignores the very real possibility that your choice of actions (or inaction) can bring harm to others if you carry/enable infections to spread through the populace. Now we’re up to rhetoric and fear mongering with mercury.” LOL! As you fear-monger about how my so-called “inaction” can bring harm to others, you claim that I am fear-mongering because I state that mercury is dangerous, even in small doses. Oh, the irony of hypocrisy!
In all REALITY, I “trumpet[ed]” NOTHING (nor did I “lash out,” “go off,” or any of your other false accusations you have made against me, for that matter). That’s all just your EMOTIONALLY-CHA
That I am Individually Sovereign is more than just a “political value,” or a “personal philosophy,” by the way. It is a FACT! Those who deny this are simply those who wish to violate me, by way of robbery, slavery, assault and/or murder, as I already explained to you during one of our previous debates on MY page.
Rayn: Brian, it’s unbelievable that you’re STILL trying to push your “anti-vaccinati
For every attempt you make to distort my position, I will just repeat myself, again! “Vaccines should only be recommended for use against the MOST DEADLY or MOST DESTRUCTIVE VIRUSES, and ONLY DURING AN ACTUAL or IMMINENTLY EMERGING PANDEMIC! To do anything outside of these medical guidelines is almost guaranteed to be POLITICALLY or FINANCIALLY motivated! And, history shows that giving out flu vaccinations to the public when there is no real threat taking place is just a recipe for human calamity!”
Either way, the ONLY two vaccinations I specifically said I won’t take are the HPV (although, I also wouldn’t have taken the Hep B vaccine, either) and the seasonal flu vaccine! And, I fail to see how refusing an HPV vaccine (or a Hep B one), or a flu shot will “bring harm to others”! To begin, I don’t even have HPV, and I only have monogamous sex with my husband, so you can REST ASSURED that you and the rest of the population are absolutely SAFE from any infection due to my “inaction”!
As for seasonal flu vaccine, one must actually catch it in order to become a “carrier.” And, though I’ve never actually had the flu in my life, even on the rare occassion that I show even the slightest cold symptoms, I STILL do not go out in public, anyway. Therefore, there is no “very real possibility” that I could spread any flu virus to others. Meanwhile, if I were to catch a symptom-free version of the flu, I would be very highly unlikely to spread it – since, one would have to inhale or ingest drops of my saliva or mucus in order for me to transfer it to them. Besides, let us not forget that there are many strains of flu that are not vaccination-pre
The CDC already recommends that those who have had Guillain-Barré Syndrome DO NOT take the flu shot. And, this is because of a LATER-FOUND connection between flu vaccination and the condition – after hundreds upon hundreds were made to suffer. Meanwhile, ONLY NOW are researchers making the connection between certain versions of the flu vaccine and Narcolepsy. Therefore, since my father suffers from severe Narcolepsy, while I was also literally BORN with severe neurological issues (I spent weeks in ICU at birth, and almost the entire first year of my life receiving neurological drugs, due to a seriously complicated birth), there is a “very real possibility” that taking any of these flu shots could trigger a number of debilitating reactions in my body, the likes of which could completely disable me! Therefore, I am under no obligation to take such a medical risk, and cripple myself, simply in order to prevent myself from catching flu! To imply that I am somehow a risk to society due to my “inaction” is a LAUGHABLE claim, and ignores my own medical history, as well as my family medical history – purely in an effort to put ME at risk!
Read the links I have already provided in relation to influenza vaccinations:
Miller et al. Risk of narcolepsy in children receiving an AS03 adjuvanted AH1N1 (2009) influenza vaccine in England. (2013). British Medical Journal.
Partinen et al. Increased incidence and clinical picture of childhood narcolepsy following the 2009 H1N1 pandemic vaccination campaign in Finland. PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e3372
Nohynek et al. AS03 adjuvanted AH1N1 vaccine associated with an abrupt increase in the incidence of childhood narcolepsy in Finland. PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e3353
Now, read these articles:
Flashback March 24, 1976: Ford Orders Swine Flu Shot for All:
Miami Man Contracts Guillain-Barré Syndrome, Nearly Dies After Getting Flu Shot:
And, let us not forget that the creation of large supplies of flu vaccination actually seems allow for the “emergence of a vaccine-resista
Paradox of Vaccination: Is Vaccination Really Effective Against Avian Flu Epidemics? (2009)
Here was the ORIGINAL link I provided for this study:
(I provided the PubMed one above, on top of the original, in order to head off any efforts to poison the well, in lieu of reviewing and addressing the ACTUAL data)
According to the findings of this study, “Results show that a vaccination to prevent the spread of disease can instead spread the disease when the resistant strain is less virulent than the sensitive strain. If the loss is high, the program does not prevent the spread of the resistant strain despite a large prevalence rate of the program. The epidemic’s final size can be larger than that before the vaccination program. “
Therefore, it should be clear why I previously stated, “vaccines should only be recommended for use against the MOST DEADLY or MOST DESTRUCTIVE VIRUSES, and ONLY DURING AN ACTUAL or IMMINENTLY EMERGING PANDEMIC! To do anything outside of these medical guidelines is almost guaranteed to be POLITICALLY or FINANCIALLY motivated! And, history shows that giving out flu vaccinations to the public when there is no real threat taking place is just a recipe for human calamity!”
I’ll also tell you exactly what I told Terrell: ” Go ahead! Take AS MANY FLU VACCINATIONS AS YOU POSSIBLY CAN, for as many years in a row as you possibly can! That is your right to do! However, everyone else has the same right to make their OWN decision about whether or not they want to take the RISK of injecting mercury into THEIR own bodies – and, should be INFORMED about its presence, as well as the dangers associated with accumulation of mercury into the human body! No amount of claims about how small the amount of mercury contained within certain vaccines is compared to that of fish, and unsubstantiated
Rayn: “The fallacious autism-vaccine thing has creeped up a few times,” Brian? LOL! Only from your buddy, Terrell, that is!
“Bose-O’Reilly et al. (2010), which you cited, warns of the dangers of chronic exposure in our environment, food, industry,” Brian? Indeed, it does! And, many other articles I cited here do that same thing! And, that is PRECISELY why using mercury-based additives in vaccines is dangerous! This particular toxin has CUMULATIVE EFFECTS, EVEN in ethylmercury form, as even your boy, Terrell’s, “Thiomerisol” wikipedia article stated: “Thiomersal is very toxic by inhalation, ingestion, and in contact with skin (EC hazard symbol T+), with a danger of CUMULATIVE EFFECTS.” It’s as I have already stated, “human beings ARE NOT lab rats, living in the tidy ease of a CONTROL SETTING, with environmental factors being introduced one at a time! Instead, we are contending with MANY different factors, all at once!” When dealing with the topic of mercury in vaccines, we must consider the fact that many individuals are already being exposed to an increasing amount of mercury due to environmental factors:
Read these links that I have already previously posted:
New UN Environment Studies Show Rising Mercury Threat to People in Developing Countries:
84% of Fish Contaminated by Mercury, Study Finds:
Study Finds High-Fructose Corn Syrup Contains Mercury:
And, here are a few new ones, as well:
Mercury Levels Rising Dangerously (In India):
Alarming Rise in Mercury Levels in Asia: UN (Same UN Study Referenced Above):
Mercury Found in Blood of One-Third of American Women:
(Study found compelling evidence that inorganic mercury deposition within the human body is a cumulative process, increasing with age and overall in the population over time)
High Mercury Levels Found in One-Fourth of Adults (NY’ers):
Big Increase (50%) in Ocean Mercury Found; Study Predicts More Human Threat from Fish:
Here’s another intriguing NON-NEUROPATHOG
Higher Mercury Levels in Humans Associated With Increased Risk for Diabetes:
Rayn: “I didn’t see anything about a so-called cumulative/
I would suggest that you read up on the following study:
Integrating Experimental (In Vitro and in Vivo) Neurotoxicity Studies of Low-Dose Thimerosal Relevant to Vaccines (June 2011):
“Information extracted from studies indicates that: (a) activity of low doses of Thimerosal against isolated human and animal brain cells was found in all studies and is consistent with Hg neurotoxicity; (b) the neurotoxic effect of ethylmercury has not been studied with co-occurring adjuvant-Al in TCVs; (c) animal studies have shown that exposure to Thimerosal-Hg can lead to accumulation of inorganic Hg in brain, and that (d) doses relevant to TCV exposure possess the potential to affect human neuro-developme
Meanwhile, if you actually are suggesting that mercury is not well-known to induce synergistic toxicity when combined with other toxic metals, then I would direct you to do some more research! Here’s a good place to start:
Combined Effects in Toxicology–A Rapid Systematic Testing Procedure: Cadmium, Mercury, and Lead (September 1978):
As for the cumulative effects of thimerisol/
Rayn: “[You] don’t know why they wrote in the abstract ‘[T]here is no known safe level of exposure’,” Brian? They wrote it because it’s a fact! The EPA/WHO thresholds you mention specifically mention what is “tolerable,” not what is SAFE, nor what is HEALTHY! As you can further read from the abstract of that very September 2010 study for yourself, “Ideally, NEITHER CHILDREN NOR ADULTS SHOULD HAVE ANY MERCURY IN THEIR BODIES because it provides NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS […] PREVENTION is the key to reducing mercury poisoning.”
Even in a very recent study that does paraphrase the claim of WHO to classify ethylmercury as “safe,” actually demonstrates that it it is not, especially when taking into account the additive effects of ethyl and methylmercury combined together in the human body:
Toxicity of Ethylmercury (and Thimerosal): A Comparison with Methylmercury (February 2013):
Here’s an excerpt of the abstract: “In vitro studies comparing etHg with meHg demonstrate equivalent measured outcomes for cardiovascular,
Another study that mentions the so-called “safety” of ethylmercury, once again, demonstrates that it is not scientifically supported, nor even the opposition to such a claim, as of yet:
Thiomersal and Immunisations (December 2004):
Here’s an excerpt of the abstract: “Various international committees (European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, EMEA, US Public Health Service/
Even a study that specifically researches the “safety” of thiomersal-cont
The Evidence for the Safety of Thiomersal in Newborn and Infant Vaccines (May 2004):
Here’s an excerpt of the abstract: “The scientific evidence is not yet sufficiently strong to provide the same level of assurance for thiomersal-cont
Rayn: Here’s a few MORE RECENT studies worth noting, Brian (as the last two above are almost a decade old):
Maternal Thimerosal Exposure Results in Aberrant Cerebellar Oxidative Stress, Thyroid Hormone Metabolism, and Motor Behavior in Rat Pups; Sex- and Strain-Dependen
According to the abstract, “Methylmercury (Met-Hg) and ethylmercury (Et-Hg) are powerful toxicants with a range of harmful neurological effects in humans and animals. While Met-Hg is a recognized trigger of oxidative stress and an endocrine disruptor impacting neurodevelopmen
According to the abstract, “Thimerosal, an organomercurial
Neonatal Administration of Thimerosal Causes Persistent Changes in Mu Opioid Receptors in the Rat Brain (November 2010):
According to the abstract, “Thimerosal added to some pediatric vaccines is suspected in pathogenesis of several neurodevelopmen
Let me point out ANOTHER all-important theme in the first four studies cited above: the lack of COMPLETE EVIDENCE on the topic, and A NEED FOR FURTHER STUDIES to take place:
(1) “…In real-life scenarios, a simultaneous exposure to both etHg and meHg might result in enhanced neurotoxic effects in developing mammals. However, our knowledge on this subject is still incomplete, and studies are required to address the predictability of the additive or synergic toxicological effects of etHg and meHg (or other neurotoxicants)
(2) “Various international committees (European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, EMEA, US Public Health Service/
(3) “Until such time as the scientific evidence is to hand, thiomersal-free
(4) “While Met-Hg is a recognized trigger of oxidative stress and an endocrine disruptor impacting neurodevelopmen
I can continue to provide more of these studies, if needed, as there are many more available on PubMed, and many of them are very recent, following up on some of the decade-old studies that were published previously, now that science has even better tools and means at its disposal. Yet, the fact remains, that what we do irrefutably know about mercury, in all of its forms, is that it is HIGHLY TOXIC in large doses, and induces cumulative neurotoxicity in chronic smaller doses! We also know, that unlike other toxins, mercury stands out as having NO PLACE in the HUMAN BODY, and has NO PHYSIOLOGICAL BENEFITS! And, this is PRECISELY why I previously stated, “after decades of vaccinating populations with mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde-ba
Brian K.: I am a fool indeed to keep coming back to this. It’s like trying to climb out of a pit but I keep falling back in.
Well now you’ve gone way beyond the scope of the vaccine-public health topics here. You bring up an old an unrelated issue to tarnish my character/
That wasn’t a “debate” with P.C. That was her making up bold faced lies about autism, prevalence, etc. I told her that was incorrect and even showed her this graph I made from the CDC’s official numbers.
She got belligerent. Deliberately insulting me stating my evidence was wrong. She kept touting that she got a B in a basic stats class many years ago and saying she knew more than I did even though I have master’s (Ph.D. in progress) and statistics is my profession. I admit I lost my temper, but then I regained my composure and just ignored her while she kept going on trying to provoke me. Maybe we ask some of the other people who witnessed that like Sybelle, Jonas, Steve K.
P.C. isn’t very credible. This is the same woman that made tons of paranoid accusations and harassments which got her kicked out of A.S.A.N. and G.R.A.S.P. and further alienated everyone in our so-called community.
So much for your RULES OF LOGICAL DEBATE!!!111!!1
Brian K.: I find it sad that this whole thing is so hostile and combative. This shouldn’t be a battle or competition. It’s supposed to be an exchange of ideas that brings all parties to a greater understanding of the issues. Civil disagreement is healthy and necessary.
“I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.” ~ Dudley Field Malone
But if you come in dead certain of your position you won’t learn anything. You just try to browbeat into submission with WALL OF TEXT and dozens of links that run the gamut from reputable to hack sources.
Rayn, I’m a bit distrubed to learn you’ve been copy+pasting my old FB comments to your blog behind my back. You might call it debate but it’s hearsay to allege what I’ve said and not notify or allow me to participate/
I’ve had enough. You win.
Rayn: Claiming me to be a “fool” (as you did here, in the comments section of this post), is an AD HOMINEM attack, Brian! And, when you did that, it was YOU who brought the “debate” OUTSIDE of the topic at hand! What would EVER make you think that I wouldn’t respond to what you wrote about me? Are you really under the impression that you can call me a “fool,” and that I must continue to robotically adhere to the topic at hand, afterwards? If you wanted to stay ON TOPIC, you would NEVER have written such a thing about me! You may claim that I “bring up an old an unrelated issue to tarnish my character/
As for you calling P.C. a “BITCH” right in front of me, you can claim, “that wasn’t a ‘debate’ with [her]. That was her making up bold faced lies about autism, prevalence, etc.,” but that’s just an excuse for bad behavior, because you have no evidence to indicate that she was willfully lying, rather than just simply being mistaken. You may say that she got “belligerent,” but rest assured that she never once verbally assaulted you, like you did to her! She was simply being stubborn about her viewpoint, just as you were being stubborn about your “evidence” – something that you both had a right to do. She wasn’t “deliberately insulting [you] stating [your] evidence was wrong.” Saying that only indicates that you had likely become too emotionally invested in your “evidence,” then! She simply said that she didn’t agree with, or care for, your evidence (not you) – and, she did so WITHOUT flinging out ANY verbal assaults against you! I challenge you to name a SINGLE INSULT that she called you! You had ABSOLUTELY NO NEED to say such a completely sexist word like “BITCH” to her for possibly being mistaken about her facts, or even for stubbornly refusing to take your chart seriously! “Maybe we ask some of the other people who witnessed that like Sybelle, Jonas, Steve,” you say? Go ahead! I was in the unique position of sitting right across from you and P.C. before and when things got ugly, unlike any of the rest of them (I can easily establish this fact with the pictures I took that day), but one thing I KNOW FOR CERTAIN is that NONE OF THEM will be able to claim that she called you even a SINGLE NAME, even AFTER you called her a “BITCH”! (Truly sorry to be tagging y’all in this post, Sybelle, Jonas and Steve, but I can only HOPE you’ll understand that I’m just responding to Brian’s tags. I already know EXACTLY what I saw and heard at the Skylight Diner on the night of June 13th, 2012, and it CANNOT be disputed).
You can scream to the hills that “P.C. isn’t very credible,” Brian, but it isn’t her who is saying you called her a “BITCH,” it is ME, who WITNESSED IT happen with my own eyes and ears! So, it is meaningless for you to state that “this is the same woman that made tons of paranoid accusations and harassments which got her kicked out of A.S.A.N. and G.R.A.S.P.” You called her a “BITCH” long before those things happened! By the way, I’m the one who is directly responsible for her being booted from ASAN, due to the “paranoid accusations” and “harassments” you mention – most of which were ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY and CONTINUOUSLY directed against ME (which I’ll explain why she did in a moment)! And, ALL of her “paranoid accusations” and “harassments,” followed by her subsequently being booted from GRASP, then ASAN, began AFTER you called her a “BITCH,” and her bad behavior was actually VERY MUCH tied into what YOU SPEWED at her! Strangely, she had decided that no one else was her “real” friend, except me, because no one else but me had interceded when you said what you did – even though I told her MANY times that the others present MOST LIKELY just DIDN’T HEAR what you said to her, and so, of course, didn’t respond to it! And, when I continued to hang out with those same people, afterwards, P.C. became very possessive, because she wanted me to spend my time in the city with her, exclusively. So, while everyone else got an email or two with “paranoid accusations” and “harassments,” I received very many more than everyone else combined, and over a much longer period!
Keep in mind that I’m not blaming you for her REACTION to you calling her a “BITCH,” as that is her own set of character flaws emerging in the face of adversity, but I want you to realize that once you called me a “fool” during this debate, you revealed to me a very negative pattern about your character, too. And, you really should own up to it, instead of down-playing it, so that you can STOP ACTING IN SUCH AN UNACCEPTABLE WAY from now on, because it’s not cool to get so overly emotional during debates that you begin verbally assaulting others. No amount of feeling that you are “right” should justify your repeatedly-occu
Rayn: “I find it sad that this whole thing is so hostile and combative. This shouldn’t be a battle or competition,” you say, Brian? Well, you can give all credit to Terrell for all of those things, since he chose to not only initiate hostilities, but also, to engage in the verbal assaults that you were ALL TO WILLING to follow up on! Show me a single name I called anyone here that WASN’T written in quotes to indicate that it was used against myself or Genaire, FIRST!
“You just try to browbeat into submission with WALL OF TEXT and dozens of links that run the gamut from reputable to hack sources,” you say? Sounds like a pathetic excuse to not address any of the reputable links I provided. I could levy the same exact “browbeat[ing]”
“I’m a bit distrubed to learn you’ve been copy+pasting my old FB comments to your blog behind my back,” you say? While I’m sorry to know that my actions disturb you, I did nothing behind your back. You chose to comment on a PUBLIC SOCIAL NETWORK, and on a PUBLIC POST, so there is absolutely NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY, nor do I need your permission, nor to inform you (although I did tell you about it during this “debate,” when I saw that there was a RELEVANT REASON to do so)! FB even acknowledges this fact, not too mention that ALL personal profile posts can even be retroactively set from “friends only” to “worldwide” at ANY TIME! Besides this, you commented ON MY FB PAGE, so I can freely distribute it wherever I please! Finally, I didn’t even tie my blogs of our debates directly to you, as your last name WAS NOT EVEN USED!
“You might call it debate but it’s hearsay to allege what I’ve said and not notify or allow me to participate/
“I’ve had enough. You win,” you say? You called me a “fool,” made false accusations against me, and told me I was on a “soapbox,” “spread[ing] propaganda,” and “conspiracy theories,” and you did so the VERY FIRST TIME I engaged in a debate on your page, though you have debated with me on my page MULTIPLE TIMES… Hmmm… How exactly does that qualify as winning? I actually see it as something entirely different!