UN Debate on removing thimerosal from vaccines worldwide

[prosciencemum]

Thought this deserved it's own thread,, given the debate about to happen.

Some info from the other thread in which it was discussed

"It's the United Nations Environment Programme which debates these things (www.unep.org).

The next debate happens 13-18th January in Geneva.
http://www.unep.org/hazardoussubstances/Mercury/Negotiations/INC5/tabid/3471/Default.aspx

It appears they asked the WHO for input on thimerosal in vaccines, and the statements they have are all linked here: http://www.unep.org/hazardoussubstances/Portals/9/Mercury/Documents/INC5/WHO%20Submission%20for%20Mercury%20INC5_18%20December%202012.pdf"

Also I found this commentary in pediatrics about it this morning
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/131/1/149.extract

[prosciencemum]

If you want to back track, this is the original thread: http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1370572/vaccines-and-premature-puberty/

[prosciencemum]

So I read more about this in the news yesterday - well kind of. Mostly the UN debate is about reducing the demand for mercury products in order to reduce the amount of toxic metallic mercury dust which gets into the environment.

 So from their point of view, thimerosol is something which contains mercury (ie an end product), so banning its use would reduce the demand for mercury. Seems like for the UN it was never a vaccine safety issue..... simply a wish to remove metallic 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20972620

 For me, yet again, that article and the discussion of vast quantities of metallic mercury in our oceans and food chain yet again put into perspective for me that the tiny tiny amounts in a single (or handful) of vaccines, cannot be of any harm. 

I read somewhere the content of a vaccine is comparable to that in 5 tuna sandwichs (and the type of mercury salt in the tuna is considered more dangerous than the type in vaccines too).... 

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

So I read more about this in the news yesterday - well kind of. Mostly the UN debate is about reducing the demand for mercury products in order to reduce the amount of toxic metallic mercury dust which gets into the environment.

 So from their point of view, thimerosol is something which contains mercury (ie an end product), so banning its use would reduce the demand for mercury. Seems like for the UN it was never a vaccine safety issue..... simply a wish to remove metallic 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20972620

 For me, yet again, that article and the discussion of vast quantities of metallic mercury in our oceans and food chain yet again put into perspective for me that the tiny tiny amounts in a single (or handful) of vaccines, cannot be of any harm. 

I read somewhere the content of a vaccine is comparable to that in 5 tuna sandwichs (and the type of mercury salt in the tuna is considered more dangerous than the type in vaccines too).... 

Shit. I just had a tuna sandwich. I guess I should have just gotten that damn flu shot. 

[prosciencemum]

Yes. The amount of mercury in any vaccine which contains it is negligible compared to what you will consume from food. Get the single dose version of the flu shot and its even zero mercury.

Anyone hear anything - this debate should now be over.....

[prosciencemum]

So it seems they've reached and agreement - although thimerosal in vaccines is not specifically discussed in this article, which is more generally about environmental mercury (main point of the UN debate it turned out).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21078176

[prosciencemum]

Oh, ok - they exempted thimerosol in vaccines from the ban - stating that to ban it would endanger millions of children in the developing world by reducing their access to vaccines.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/new_scientist/2013/01/mercury_treaty_debate_should_thimerosal_be_banned_as_a_vaccine_preservative.html