Why was the flu shot thread removed?

So Moderators, why was the flu shot thread removed? No warnings, no comments, just outright censorship of the thread?

I don't get it.

Oh man. That thread was just fine last night before I went to bed. There were some interesting links in that thread.

I'm disappointed because someone was trying to tell me that ethylmercury was harmless to the human body. I'd like to see more info on that.

We Want To Know Why The Flu Shot Thread Was Removed.

Moderators,

Why did you remove the flu shot thread?

I agree. Even though I think Storm is in complete denial, it's still interesting to debate I don't mind being called a few names now and then. For the most part, the thread concerned a subject that the two opposing sides feel passionately about.

Wait, what am I in denial about exactly? That the flu shot is non-toxic?

Is this the official stance of those who advocate the flu shot, that it's non-toxic? Because that can be systematically disproved simply by the ingredients contained within the shot.

I assume what you're saying is that the toxicity is worth being protected from influenza.

Don't know, but I'm guessing flooding the board with these sorts of threads will get YOU removed...

Jeriko said:

Moderators,

Why did you remove the flu shot thread?

Click to expand...

It was removed because you are a clown.

Phil said:

It was removed because you are a clown.

Click to expand...

I second that.

stormholloway said:

Wait, what am I in denial about exactly? That the flu shot is non-toxic?

Is this the official stance of those who advocate the flu shot, that it's non-toxic? Because that can be systematically disproved simply by the ingredients contained within the shot.

I assume what you're saying is that the toxicity is worth being protected from influenza.

Click to expand...

Try looking it up. I can repost all those links anytime.

But here is some information from the FDA report:
http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimerosal.htm
Under the heading Thimersol toxicity there is information about testing (yes, toxicity testing) of ethyl mercury in animals and in humans.

Some of that info is here:
"Several animal studies have evaluated the toxicity of thimerosal. In 1931 Powell and Jamieson reported acute toxicity studies in several animal species. Maximum tolerated doses not associated with death of the animals were 20 mg thimerosal/kg (rabbits) and 45 mg/kg (rats). Blair evaluated the administration of thimerosal intranasally for 190 days and observed no histopathological changes in the brain or kidney (Blair et al. 1975). Magos et al. directly compared the toxicity of ethyl- versus methylmercury in adult male and female rats administered 5 daily doses of equimolar concentrations of ethyl- or methylmercury by gavage (Magos et al 1985). Magos concluded that ethylmercury, the mercury derivative found in thimerosal, is less neurotoxic than methylmercury, the mercury derivative for which the various guidelines are based.

One final piece of data regarding thimerosal is worth noting. At the initial National Vaccine Advisory Committee-sponsored meeting on thimerosal in 1999, concerns were expressed that infants may lack the ability to eliminate mercury. More recent NIAID-supported studies at the University of Rochester and National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, MD examined levels of mercury in blood and other samples from infants who had received routine immunizations with thimerosal-containing vaccines. [Pichichero ME, et al. Lancet 360:1737-1741 (2002)] Blood levels of mercury did not exceed safety guidelines for methyl mercury for all infants in these studies. Further, mercury was cleared from the blood in infants exposed to thimerosal faster than would be predicted for methyl mercury; infants excreted significant amounts of mercury in stool after thimerosal exposure, thus removing mercury from their bodies. These results suggest that there are differences in the way that thimerosal and methyl mercury are distributed, metabolized, and excreted. Thimerosal appears to be removed from the blood and body more rapidly than methyl mercury. NIAID is sponsoring a follow-up study with larger numbers of infants in Buenos Aires where thimerosal-containing vaccines are still administered to children. See the NIH/NIAID vaccines/thimerosal web site http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/thimerosalqa.htm.

There is more information here:
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/thimerosalqa.htm
This site has information about a study published in the Lancelot, a medical journal. From the site:
"The results were published in the November 30, 2002, issue of the scientific journal, The Lancet.

Reference: Pichichero ME, Cernichiari E, Lopreiato J, and Treanor J. Mercury concentrations and metabolism in infants receiving vaccines containing thimerosal: a descriptive study. Lancet 360:1737-1741 (2002) www.thelancet.com"

In short, testing has been done and is continuing, and so far support the view that vaccines are safe.

Rod

stormholloway said:

I'm disappointed because someone was trying to tell me that ethylmercury was harmless to the human body. I'd like to see more info on that.

Click to expand...

Like Jack Daniels and water, it is safe in the appropriate doses.
I just posted links to medical journals with the results of testing.

As I said before, you could easily find this information out if you looked.
Rod

Rod,
When you get a flu shot, how much total fluid is injected to your body? Is it just a few cc's?

rjkardo said:

Several animal studies have evaluated the toxicity of thimerosal. In 1931 Powell and Jamieson reported acute toxicity studies in several animal species. Maximum tolerated doses not associated with death of the animals were 20 mg thimerosal/kg (rabbits) and 45 mg/kg (rats). Blair evaluated the administration of thimerosal intranasally for 190 days and observed no histopathological changes in the brain or kidney (Blair et al. 1975). Magos et al. directly compared the toxicity of ethyl- versus methylmercury in adult male and female rats administered 5 daily doses of equimolar concentrations of ethyl- or methylmercury by gavage (Magos et al 1985). Magos concluded that ethylmercury, the mercury derivative found in thimerosal, is less neurotoxic than methylmercury, the mercury derivative for which the various guidelines are based.

Click to expand...

Interesting conclusion. Did you even bother to read this? Ethylmercury is simply less neuro-toxic than methylmercury. That's all this says.

One final piece of data regarding thimerosal is worth noting. At the initial National Vaccine Advisory Committee-sponsored meeting on thimerosal in 1999, concerns were expressed that infants may lack the ability to eliminate mercury. More recent NIAID-supported studies at the University of Rochester and National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, MD examined levels of mercury in blood and other samples from infants who had received routine immunizations with thimerosal-containing vaccines. [Pichichero ME, et al. Lancet 360:1737-1741 (2002)] Blood levels of mercury did not exceed safety guidelines for methyl mercury for all infants in these studies. Further, mercury was cleared from the blood in infants exposed to thimerosal faster than would be predicted for methyl mercury; infants excreted significant amounts of mercury in stool after thimerosal exposure, thus removing mercury from their bodies. These results suggest that there are differences in the way that thimerosal and methyl mercury are distributed, metabolized, and excreted. Thimerosal appears to be removed from the blood and body more rapidly than methyl mercury. NIAID is sponsoring a follow-up study with larger numbers of infants in Buenos Aires where thimerosal-containing vaccines are still administered to children. See the NIH/NIAID vaccines/thimerosal web site

Click to expand...

This is simply rehashing the same information as above: that ethylmercury metabolizes more quickly than methylmercury.

All this coming from the same FDA that said aspartame was safe. You've done nothing here but show me that ethylmercury is less toxic than methylmercury.

And if you're really going to compare Jack Daniels to mercury then we're done here because at that point you know you've lost. Like you said, anything in certain doses is toxic, so does that magically make everything equally toxic? No.

Toxicity isn't just about amounts but in what ways it is toxic to a very complex human physiology. Mercury causes irreversible brain damage and neuron degeneration.

Oh by the way, you have several more ingredients to explain away, including ethylene glycol, formaldehyde, and aluminum.

Oh and don't forget phenol, which was even used by that clever German SS as a means of rapid extermination! Good luck with that one.

stormholloway said:

Interesting conclusion. Did you even bother to read this? Ethylmercury is simply less neuro-toxic than methylmercury. That's all this says.



This is simply rehashing the same information as above: that ethylmercury metabolizes more quickly than methylmercury.

All this coming from the same FDA that said aspartame was safe. You've done nothing here but show me that ethylmercury is less toxic than methylmercury.

And if you're really going to compare Jack Daniels to mercury then we're done here because at that point you know you've lost. Like you said, anything in certain doses is toxic, so does that magically make everything equally toxic? No.

Toxicity isn't just about amounts but in what ways it is toxic to a very complex human physiology. Mercury causes irreversible brain damage and neuron degeneration.

Oh by the way, you have several more ingredients to explain away, including ethylene glycol, formaldehyde, and aluminum.

Oh and don't forget phenol, which was even used by that clever German SS as a means of rapid extermination! Good luck with that one.

Click to expand...

Try doing some research will you?
I posted links to the research on ethyl mercury you said did not exist.
There is a lot more information there, easy to find if you would even try.

You know why I mentioned Jack Daniels and water. Because of your comments about how something that is toxic is toxic at any levels. The point was to show that your statement was false and your understanding of chemistry and medicine is severely lacking.

Are you really done? I am tired of doing the research and showing you where you are mistaken.

Rod

stormholloway said:

So Moderators, why was the flu shot thread removed? No warnings, no comments, just outright censorship of the thread?

I don't get it.

Click to expand...

I think actually the info in the thread was actually getting kind of dangerous. like what if someone took the mercury info as being true and ingested some of it and got sick and died, they could sue TW, and that kind of risk is just not worth taking.

Fee said:

Rod,
When you get a flu shot, how much total fluid is injected to your body? Is it just a few cc's?

Click to expand...

I have not gotten one yet this year. For the last few years (since 2003) I was in Afghanistan and we received flu shots on the bases. The official dose for an adult is .5 ml but I cannot recall how much this actually was in the shot.

For comparison, 5 ml is about 1 teaspoon.

Rod

Fedace said:

I think actually the info in the thread was actually getting kind of dangerous. like what if someone took the mercury info as being true and ingested some of it and got sick and died, they could sue TW, and that kind of risk is just not worth taking.

Click to expand...

Or what if someone believed the nonsense about vaccinations and refused to get their kids their shots. That is what scares me and what keeps me posting, trying to refute the claims about vaccinations.

Rod

rjkardo said:

Try doing some research will you?
I posted links to the research on ethyl mercury you said did not exist.
There is a lot more information there, easy to find if you would even try.

You know why I mentioned Jack Daniels and water. Because of your comments about how something that is toxic is toxic at any levels. The point was to show that your statement was false and your understanding of chemistry and medicine is severely lacking.

Are you really done? I am tired of doing the research and showing you where you are mistaken.

Rod

Click to expand...

Umm. Asking me to do research is light years away from a counterargument. I read what you posted. All they said was that ethylmercury is less neuro-toxic than methylmercury. I shouldn't have to repeat myself.

And when did I say such links didn't exist?

Did you even read what you posted? The conclusions from both quoted paragraphs was that because of its rate of metabolism, ethylmercury is less neuro-toxic than methylmercury. This is the only conclusion from that data. And I'd be very surprised to see any long term studies on the effects of ethylmercury consumption by humans.

Your tactic of telling me to do research and then talking about my lack of understanding in medicine and science is growing tiring. You dig up a couple of websites about the safety of the flu shot and suddenly you're an expert on medicine and science? Who are you kidding?

One more thing, I'm still waiting for you to address the safety of the other chemicals I mentioned, but I expect you to give the run around once more, so maybe you shouldn't bother.

Fedace said:

I think actually the info in the thread was actually getting kind of dangerous. like what if someone took the mercury info as being true and ingested some of it and got sick and died, they could sue TW, and that kind of risk is just not worth taking.

Click to expand...

And where would you purchase mercury so that you could injest it, other than canned tuna?

rjkardo said:

I have not gotten one yet this year. For the last few years (since 2003) I was in Afghanistan and we received flu shots on the bases. The official dose for an adult is .5 ml but I cannot recall how much this actually was in the shot.

For comparison, 5 ml is about 1 teaspoon.

Rod

Click to expand...

Thanks Rod, I figured it was a relatively tiny amount (once a year).

rjkardo said:

Or what if someone believed the nonsense about vaccinations and refused to get their kids their shots. That is what scares me and what keeps me posting, trying to refute the claims about vaccinations.

Rod

Click to expand...

It's what scares me too. If only science and research could hurry up and unlock the Autism mystery so that vaccines will stop being scapegoated for this. I would hate to see whooping cough and polio return to the US.

stormholloway said:

Umm. Asking me to do research is light years away from a counterargument. I read what you posted. All they said was that ethylmercury is less neuro-toxic than methylmercury. I shouldn't have to repeat myself.

And when did I say such links didn't exist?

Did you even read what you posted? The conclusions from both quoted paragraphs was that because of its rate of metabolism, ethylmercury is less neuro-toxic than methylmercury. This is the only conclusion from that data. And I'd be very surprised to see any long term studies on the effects of ethylmercury consumption by humans.

Your tactic of telling me to do research and then talking about my lack of understanding in medicine and science is growing tiring. You dig up a couple of websites about the safety of the flu shot and suddenly you're an expert on medicine and science? Who are you kidding?

One more thing, I'm still waiting for you to address the safety of the other chemicals I mentioned, but I expect you to give the run around once more, so maybe you shouldn't bother.

Click to expand...

If you read the articles, you will note that it mentions research and experiments to test the levels of toxicity of ethyl mercury. I quoted one paragraph of many. If you want me to post more, let me know. But the links are there and you can read the articles just like I did.

Ok, you mention Ethylene glycol. It took me about 45 seconds to find this information:
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts96.html
Ethylene glycol and propylene glycol are clear liquids used in antifreeze and deicing solutions. Exposure to large amounts of ethylene glycol can damage the kidneys, heart, and nervous system. Propylene glycol is generally regarded as safe for use in food.
Eating or drinking very large amounts of ethylene glycol can result in death, while large amounts can result in nausea, convulsions, slurred speech, disorientation, and heart and kidney problems.
(See the part about "very large amounts"?)

Or here:
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/bipret/1996/12/i03/abs/bp950081g.html
Poly(ethylene glycol) precipitation has been successfully used to concentrate and purify hepatitis A virus from crude lysate preparations for production of VAQTA, a highly purified, formalin-inactivated hepatitis A vaccine. Initial results showed that nucleic acids present in the starting material were problematic for the performance of the poly(ethylene glycol) precipitation step.

Further below:
These steps combined with optimization of the virus concentration, ionic strength, and pH of the poly(ethylene glycol) precipitation led to effective and selective concentration of the virus which significantly enhanced process reproducibility and control.

End comments from the articles.

Ethylene glycol is not used in the vaccine, it is used to remove water from the mixture in order to concentrate it.

The less toxic propylene glycol is actually present in some medicines, and is used to maintain moisture levels in medicines, food, food coloring and flavors and in some tobacco products.

On Aluminum:
http://www.sciam.com/askexpert_question.cfm?articleID=0000FCD2-AA88-1C71-9EB7809EC588F2D7
"...aluminum is one of the most abundant and pervasive elements. It is found everywhere--it is in the water we drink, it is in the dust we breathe, it is in many of he substances we use every day such as coke in glass bottles, food preservatives, many cosmetics and food dyes. Even if we stop using pots and pans or underarm deodorants, it will be virtually impossible to avoid aluminum."

There are more comments on Aluminum on that page.
Even more information here:
http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/moments/s1163941.htm
This article is by Dr. Charles DeCarli, the director of the Alzheimer's Disease Center at the University of Kansas Medical Center.
From the article:
Aluminum is (after oxygen and silicon) the third most common element (at 8%) in the Earth's crust. As a result, you cannot avoid being exposed to aluminum. You'll find aluminum in drinking water, foods, pharmaceuticals, anti-perspirants, and printing inks. It's used to dye fabrics, preserve wood, crack petroleum, and to make rubber, paint, explosives and glass.

And more specifically on aluminum and vaccines:
http://www.immunizationinfo.org/vaccine_components_detail.cfv?id=61
Studies have shown that many aluminum-containing vaccines cause higher and more prolonged antibody responses than comparable vaccines without the adjuvant.

More:
(Aluminum) is in many foods we eat, many personal hygiene products we apply to our skin (deodorants, for example), and many medicines we ingest. Thus, all infants are exposed to aluminum in the environment. Breast milk, for example, contains approximately 40 micrograms of aluminum per liter, and infant formulas contain an average of approximately 225 micrograms of aluminum per liter.

and finally:
A recent review of the evidence of adverse events after exposure to aluminium-containing vaccines against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP), found no evidence that aluminum salts cause any serious or long-lasting adverse events.

Oh, the abstracts of these research papers can be found by following the links at the bottom of the page.

One last comment: Aluminum hydroxide, which is one of the salts used as an adjuvant in vaccines is also used as an anti-acid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_hydroxide

"Pharmacologically, this compound is used as an antacid under names such as Alu-Cap, Aludrox or Pepsamar. The hydroxide reacts with excess acid in the stomach, reducing its acidity. This decrease of acidity of the contents of the stomach may in turn help to relieve the symptoms of ulcers, heartburn or dyspepsia. It can also cause constipation and is therefore often used with magnesium carbonate, which has counterbalancing laxative effects. This compound is also used to control phosphate levels in the blood of people suffering from kidney failure.

Aluminium hydroxide is included as an adjuvant in some vaccines, since it contributes to induction of a good antibody (Th2) response."

Do you need to see more?

Rod

stormholloway said:

Interesting conclusion. Did you even bother to read this? Ethylmercury is simply less neuro-toxic than methylmercury. That's all this says.



This is simply rehashing the same information as above: that ethylmercury metabolizes more quickly than methylmercury.

All this coming from the same FDA that said aspartame was safe. You've done nothing here but show me that ethylmercury is less toxic than methylmercury.

And if you're really going to compare Jack Daniels to mercury then we're done here because at that point you know you've lost. Like you said, anything in certain doses is toxic, so does that magically make everything equally toxic? No.

Toxicity isn't just about amounts but in what ways it is toxic to a very complex human physiology. Mercury causes irreversible brain damage and neuron degeneration.

Oh by the way, you have several more ingredients to explain away, including ethylene glycol, formaldehyde, and aluminum.

Oh and don't forget phenol, which was even used by that clever German SS as a means of rapid extermination! Good luck with that one.

Click to expand...

Phenol is too easy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloraseptic
"Chloraseptic is an American brand of oral analgesic produced by Prestige Brands Inc, used for the relief of minor sore throat and mouth pain. Its active ingredient is phenol, a compound whose antiseptic properties were discovered by Sir Joseph Lister."

http://www.drugs.com/cdi/phenol-spray.html
Phenol Spray is used for:
Treating sore throat pain, sore mouth, pain associated with canker sores, and minor mouth irritation. It may also be used for other conditions as determined by your doctor.
Phenol Spray is an oral anesthetic and analgesic combination. It works by numbing the painful or irritated areas.

http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/medicines/100001922.html
Phenol is also used as treatment for hemorrhoids.

Other chemicals answered in another post. I did not want this to get too long.
This is about ethyl mercury. Here are articles testing its safety:
http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimerosal.htm#bib
1. Batts AH, Narriott C, Martin GP, et al. The effect of some preservatives used in nasal preparations on mucociliary clearance. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology 1989; 41:156-159.
2. Batty I, Harris E, Gasson A. Preservatives and biological reagents. Developments in Biological Standardization 1974;24:131-142.
3. Beyer-Boon ME, Arntz PW, Kirk RS. A comparison of thimerosal and 50% alcohol as preservatives in urinary cytology. Journal of Clinical Pathology 1979;32:168-170.
4. Gasset AR, Itoi M, Ishii Y, Ramer RM. Teratogenicities of ophthalmic drugs. II. Teratogenicites and tissue accumulation of thimerosal. Archives of Ophthalmology 1975;93:52-55.
5. Goldman KN, Centifanta Y, Kaufman HF, et al. Prevention of surface bacterial contamination of donor corneas. Archives of Ophthalmology 1978;96:2277-2280.
6. Keeven J, Wrobel S, Portoles M, et al. Evaluating the preservative effectiveness of RGP lens care solutions. Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists Journal 1995;21:238-241.
7. Naito R, Itoh T, Hasegawa E, et al. Bronopol as a substitute for thimerosal. Developments in Biological Standardization 1974;24:39-48.
8. Wozniak-Parnowska W, Krowczynski L. New approach to preserving eye drops. Pharmacy International 1981;2(4):91-94.

Should be enough info for you to work through.
Rod

Fee said:

If only science and research could hurry up and unlock the Autism mystery so that vaccines will stop being scapegoated for this. I would hate to see whooping cough and polio return to the US.

Click to expand...

What gets me is that research, experiments and years of use have not shown any relation between vaccines and autism. What we are seeing is the waste of time and money that could both be going to real research instead being directed to something that we have already been able to disprove.

Rod

Amazing. All you've done now is show that these chemicals are found in other products that idiots choke down, not that they aren't toxic. Or you've got someone saying it's toxic, but that certain levels are "safe".

This is going nowhere.

stormholloway said:

Amazing. All you've done now is show that these chemicals are found in other products that idiots choke down, not that they aren't toxic. Or you've got someone saying it's toxic, but that certain levels are "safe".

This is going nowhere.

Click to expand...

It would go somewhere if you ever realized that toxicity and toxic threshold are two entirely different entities.

I never contested that. The difference between fluoride and JacK Daniels is that whiskey in moderation, over time, will not cause brain damage, whereas fluoride consumed over time will.

This would go somewhere if you and others would understand that different chemicals are toxic in different ways. Alcohol and fluoride are nothing alike.

Frankly, I want you to keep poisoning yourself. This is where Darwin and I agree.

stormholloway said:

Wait, what am I in denial about exactly?

Click to expand...

For a full list please see Dictionary.com

neo said:

For a full list please see Dictionary.com

Click to expand...

Well right off the bat I can tell you I've never denied the existence of aardvarks. I may not like its nocturnal burrowing habits, but I've never discounted its right to be.

Sounds like you just ranted and raved about something. Understand?

Concerned parents across the U.S. are leading a nationwide revolt against unnecessary, untested and dangerous vaccines as CDC records show a growing amount of religious exemptions on vaccine forms, following a media blitz by Jenny McCarthy in which she blamed a vaccine for causing her son's autism.

Jenny McCarthy on The View Autism & Vaccines -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc8QETKbquc&mode=related&search=

additional information-

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/vaccines/index.htm

Concerned parents across the U.S. are leading a nationwide revolt against unnecessary, untested and dangerous vaccines as CDC records show a growing amount of religious exemptions on vaccine forms, following a media blitz by Jenny McCarthy in which she blamed a vaccine for causing her son's autism.

Jenny McCarthy on The View Autism & Vaccines -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc8QE...elated&search=

additional information-

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/vaccines/index.htm

stormholloway said:

Amazing. All you've done now is show that these chemicals are found in other products that idiots choke down, not that they aren't toxic. Or you've got someone saying it's toxic, but that certain levels are "safe".

This is going nowhere.

Click to expand...

You are suggesting that Chloraseptic is toxic?
Did not notice that phenol is the active ingredient?

Rod

People should not get their health advice from celebrities who don't know the meaning of 'peer-reviewed research'. There is no link between Autism and vaccines, just hysteria (oh my GAWD, if we show Elvis' hips on TV all of our teenae girls will get PREGNANT!!!!!)

im just wondering who the "we" is that the title is refering to.
jeriko, are you by chance skitzo?

storm, are you accepting that certain levels are safe?

stormholloway said:

So Moderators, why was the flu shot thread removed? No warnings, no comments, just outright censorship of the thread?

I don't get it.

Click to expand...

Oh where, oh where has my little thread gone? Oh where, oh where could it be? :twisted:

Jeriko said:

Concerned parents across the U.S. are leading a nationwide revolt against unnecessary, untested and dangerous vaccines as CDC records show a growing amount of religious exemptions on vaccine forms, following a media blitz by Jenny McCarthy in which she blamed a vaccine for causing her son's autism.

Jenny McCarthy on The View Autism & Vaccines -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc8QETKbquc&mode=related&search=

additional information-

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/vaccines/index.htm

Click to expand...

Not sure but this could be the first time in debating history that a former Playboy Playmate was put up against hoards of international scientists/MD's/experts. Holy cow!