Thimerosal a mercury-based preservative that has been used for decades in vaccines wasn't taken out until 2001. There is so much anti-anti-vax people propaganda these days but the anti-vax people have a good point these old vaccines where pretty toxic and messed up probably mad a buncha kids autistic who knows? I was vaccinated before 2001... Kinda makes me wish my parents were crazy anti-vaxers
shareAnd the same warning goes for information on the internet.
share^^ Yep
shareIf only we were all forced to get our information from approved sources...
The internet is the reason information from all sources is as trustworthy as it is. There's competition. You can't say anything on the internet without being scrutinized. Try that in a scientific journal. You get fired.
[deleted]
[deleted]
I survived being vaccinated in the early 60s. I doubt people in the actual autism community blame vaccines for autism.
shareOne has to keep in mind that medical science has advanced since the time vaccines were first introduced. Millions of people are doing better than they would have had they not been vaccinated. Nothing is risk free - one has to weigh benefits vs risks. How do we know there's more autism today? Maybe it has more to do with better diagnosis which makes it seem like there are more cases?? Not to mention the world has twice as many people as it had back then.
shareBenefits versus risk? The benefit is the risk, of catching a virus. What about the loss? The toxic burden is a certainty. You're just repeating something you heard somewhere.
Are we also better at diagnosing asthma and every other skyrocketing autoimmune disease?
The benefit is not getting the disease. The risk is that you may suffer side effects.
sharethere is zero evidence that thimerosal had any kind of impact on anyone. zero. nada.
your parents made the right choice.
thimerosal does indeed contain mercury. what you left out is that it contains ethylmercury, which is very very different from methylmercury.
methylmercury is the type of mercury that is found is some fish. methylmercury can absolutely accumulate in a person's body through repeated exposure & can have serious health impacts.
ethylmercury passes through everyone's body much more efficiently than methylmercury. the small amounts contained in vaccines pose no health risk, and that small amount is passed through the body very quickly with no possibility of accumulating in amounts that could pose any health risk.
this is all available information. you can find it on the cdc webside, or through many many other sources if you're the type who won't listen to a government source.
I don't trust that. 600 chemicals are banned in Europe but legal in USA and put into our food to poison us. Just look at the average American body vs average European body https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/15265-the-main-difference-between-europe-and-usa. Our government doesn't give two shits about its citizens safety
sharehttps://www.who.int/immunization/newsroom/thiomersal_questions_and_answers/en/
Does the amount of thiomersal in vaccines pose a health risk ?
WHO has closely monitored scientific evidence relating to the use of thiomersal as a vaccine preservative for over 10 years, in particular through its independent expert advisory group, the Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety. The Committee has consistently reached the same conclusion: there is no evidence to suggest that the amount of thiomersal used in vaccines poses a health risk. Other expert groups (the U.S. Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the United Kingdom Committee on Safety of Medicines, and the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products), have reached similar conclusions
Bogus!
shareDo you believe in the food pyramid and male infant circumcision as well? Literally everything you've said in this thread is an appeal to authority, and the problem with that is you don't get to pick and choose.
shareMale Circumcision is mutilation and should be banned. I am so glad my momma didn't let the doctor cut up my dick right the second i entered this world. its a sick and barbaric practice
sharewell, you've said a few things in this thread.
let's consolidate & focus on the main ones here.
first, you said that the article i posted from science based medicine 'does nothing to educate,' to which i can only respond that i think you're wrong. the article quite directly addresses whether autism rates have declined since thimerosol was removed from the vax schedule - they haven't. it addresses why autism rates have increased - more consciousness to the condition, broadening of the diagnosis. that's directly relevant to the discussion, & he has actually backed up his arguments with links to peer reviewed studies.
second, you claim i am making an argument from authority. not so. if i were to simply say 'steven novella of science based medicine says it's so and he's an academic neurologist at yale' that would be an argument from authority. making a claim, then backing it up with relevant articles based on current research is simply doing what every person should do when they are assessing a claim in an area where they are not an expert - go to the experts in the field and see what they think, and see what the peer reviewed research shows.
to not do that is to simply give all opinions equal weight, and that is a path to madness.
and third, you said this:
Guess what you "left out"? You tried to tell us that ingestion is worse than injection. Or weren't we supposed to notice?[/b]
[b]There's a reason he "left out" ethylmercury versus methylmercury. You have it backwards. Ethyl is the one that primarily goes into tissues and stays there. Methyl is in the blood where it's better mobilized out of the body. You're about 20 years behind on this. That's still better than the vaccine manufacturers.
firstly, i said nothing about ingestion/injection. you made that up yourself.
and as for your statement that methylmercury is 'better mobilized out of the body...' i find that an awfully curious thing to say.
i can tell you who doesn't agree with that.
health canada:
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/vaccination-children/safety-concerns-side-effects.html
Thimerosal breaks down into ethylmercury in the body and quickly leaves the body in the stool. It does not build up in the body and does not cause health concerns. Another type of mercury, methylmercury, is the type found in certain kinds of fish, like tuna. Unlike ethylmercury, it does not leave the body and can build up, causing harm.
dr julia barrett:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280369/
The initial absorption rate and tissue distribution of mercury was similar in both exposed groups. However, total mercury progressively accumulated in the blood of methylmercury-exposed monkeys and remained detectable 28 days after the last dose. Among thimerosal-exposed monkeys, total mercury in blood declined rapidly between doses, and the researchers estimated clearance to be 5.4-fold higher than in the methylmercury group. In the thimerosal group, the half-life of total mercury in blood was 6.9 days, compared to 19.1 days for the methylmercury group.
ethylmercury & methylmercury are different.
that difference does not hinge on what country you are in.
that they are different is an opinion informed by the best evidence evaluated by individual scientists & bodies, confirmed in whatever country it's been studied.
Still mercury wish i was never injected with that shit when i was a baby. Sick world we live in can't trust nobody especially doctors
shareThat difference doesn't hinge on how many credentials you have either. That's what science is for, so we don't have to trust you. Quit pretending like you know something, or you would have just explained it yourself.
shareGuess what you "left out"? You tried to tell us that ingestion is worse than injection. Or weren't we supposed to notice?
There's a reason he "left out" ethylmercury versus methylmercury. You have it backwards. Ethyl is the one that primarily goes into tissues and stays there. Methyl is in the blood where it's better mobilized out of the body. You're about 20 years behind on this. That's still better than the vaccine manufacturers.
Mercury was never really studied before. We studied it in the environment but not in the body. We just knew it was extremely toxic. That didn't stop us from putting it in our teeth and in our vaccines. They didn't know and didn't care. Ever since the story has been changing. "Mercury can't get into the brain". "Okay it can, but it's good for children's brains". I'm not making that one up. It wasn't until much later that anyone ever tried to scapegoat babies who eat too much pilot whale. That's just stupid. Mercury testing had always been confusing. We would look at it in the blood, urine, and hair, and could never correlate it with symptoms. Now we even have a machine that can see the vapor off amalgams. Mercury is in the vaccines as a cheap preservative. Some people are especially sensitive to it. Probably in the future there will be a test for it and those people will get medical exemptions to mandatory vaccines. But no one will ever apologize.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/vaccines-still-dont-cause-autism/
this does a tidy job of summing the endlessly, repeatedly refuted claims that vaccines are/were toxic autism-causing bad things.
they're not.
That article does absolutely nothing to educate. Which is exactly why they have to keep refuting claims over and over. It's nothing but proclamations and rhetorical-put downs to shame people into feeling like vaccine denial equals holocaust denial. It's the Fox News of science.
https://chriskresser.com/dr-chris-shade-on-mercury-toxicity
Read this side by side and tell me you still don't understand how anyone could disagree with you.
That's not true. The mercury is still in the vaccines, particularly the worst one, the yearly flu vaccine. Funny thing about that is they used to tell pregnant women to avoid it. Now they tell pregnant women they're most in need of it. It flipped in early 2000s based on some bogus study about the flu causing schizophrenia, but it's actually the immune reaction to the flu, which the vaccine makes a certainty.
They did something similar with fluoride. They put it in tap water to make it unavoidable, and because fluorosis was such an epidemic visibly affecting nearly everyone raised on it, CDC had to admit it and make concessions. They say, quietly, that infants are supposed to avoid all sources of fluoride. Well first of all, how are they supposed to bathe, even if they can afford bottled water? But second, lots of bottled water specifically marketed for infants has extra fluoride added to it. CDC says nothing.
They also quietly reduced the level at which water is "optimally fluoridated". You see, fluoride doesn't have a Recommended Daily Allowance like every vitamin and mineral does. It has an LD40, a lethal dosing. Supposedly .7mg/liter is "optimal" even though it totally disregards the fact that that means different people are ingesting very different amounts all of which are optimal for each individually? Supposedly .7mg/liter is just right and anything even a little bit over would be too much. The previous level, also said to be "optimal" at the time, was just slightly higher at 1.4, and questioning it was tantamount to questioning 6 million in the holocaust. It proved to be very wrong. How did they come up with these numbers? Think about what kind of studies these scientists would have had to do to find out so precisely. It never happened.
Yeah the fluoride in the water is no good! Flu vaccines are the dumbest vaccines only sheeple get that one. Getting the flu is no big deal its healthy to get a little sick once in a while anyways
shareCDC: 80,000 people died of flu last winter (2017-2018) in U.S., highest death toll in 40 years.
shareYeah but i bet most of those people were old farts or had aids or something. Nobody in there prime needs a flu vaccine
shareOld farts < The elderly.
Aids or something < Compromised immune systems.
Have some damn respect.
But yes, the elderly and children are the most susceptible to complications and death from the flu, but to say healthy adults don't succumb to it as well is being willfully ignorant.
Question. If you had young children or elderly parents, would you still not get a flu shot and just hope they don't get it and die?
Naw dude survival of the fitness man. What doesn't kill the kids or elderly people makes them stronger
shareSo if your child caught the flu from you and died, that's just survival or the fittest? Would you feel any remorse?
shareNope if my kid died from the flu he would probably not make it far anyways
shareI'm not sure I follow. Could you elaborate? Healthy kids succumb to the flu every year. It doesn't mean they are genetically weak or anything like that.....
shareI never got any flu shots when I was a kid and i survived just fine. Its a scam only dumbos get flu shots
shareI could care less. Thats purely anecdotal. Fact is, around 50 percent of all children under 5 years old who die from the flu were PREVIOUSLY HEALTHY, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
And you never answered my question. What did you mean by " if my kid died from the flu he would probably not make it far anyways."
getting your flu shot is simple good manners.
getting the flu is no joke, even if you're young & healthy. it can knock you off your feet for weeks, putting you in a miserable state, and if you can lessen your risk, it only makes sense to do so.
but if you're just looking at the consequences to yourself, then you could take a 'my body, my choice' tactic. but you don't just impact yourself. you impact your friends & neighbors & family & everyone who lives around you and all the people who come in contact with the people who come in contact with you.
the flu can be very serious, deadly to old people, very young children & people with existing health conditions. as padeen noted, the 2017-18 year was particularly bad. the numbers usually aren't quite so high, but even in good years, 10s of thousands of people die from the flu.
if everyone got their shot, those numbers would go down. it's no exaggeration to say that thousands of deaths would be prevented if more people got vaccinated.
not getting vaccinated is just an irresponsible act of jerkiness, an act of complete disregard for your neighbors & the people you live with.
Getting the flu is supposed to be healthy it kills your cancer cells developing in your body and stuff. I would rather get a horrible flu for a couple days or week than get some dumb shot filled with fucked up chemicals
share