Peanut oil in Vaccines causing massive peanut allergy? - Page 6

[Rrrrrachel]

The FDA link seems to imply that while the precise formula might be a trade secret, there's no reason why all ingredients wouldn't be listed (vs all ingredients and exact amounts). It also says trade secrets only apply to innovative techniques (so if peanut oil is widely recognized as having been used in the 60s and 70s that wouldn't apply) and is weighed against public harm caused by lack of disclosure.

This all still seems like a lot of rumor and unfounded speculation. It's so easy to get conclusive evidence, yet random speculation is all we have. I think that says it all.

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 
 It's so easy to get conclusive evidence, yet random speculation is all we have. I think that says it all.

and that means you are not correct because you can not prove what you saying conclusively 

[erigeron]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

and that means you are not correct because you can not prove what you saying conclusively 

Right back atcha. 

[Rrrrrachel]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

and that means you are not correct because you can not prove what you saying conclusively 

Again, I'm not the one making a claim. I have nothing to prove.

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 


So you're not saying here that vaccine manufacturers don't have to disclose food products as ingredients?

It's not just vaccine manufacturers.

If you go to a restaurant or even the deli counter and buy chicken salad, they are not required to disclose the ingredients in their chicken salad, even though they are food products!  As long as it's not a pre-packaged food, they can (and do) claim that their recipe is a trade secret and they do not have to disclose the ingredients!

There's no law stating, "the following manufacturers are protected from listing ingredients in their products."  

There IS a law stating that packaged foods must clearly label the top 8 common food allergens.  There is no law that food products must list ingredients that are used in processing, but are not added to the final product.  Therefore, something like Rice Dream Rice Milk does not have to list the barley enzymes they use in their list of ingredients, because barley is not one of the top 8 food allergens, even though it is a gluten source.  In fact, they say on the carton that Rice Dream is gluten-free--except very sensitive celiacs react to the amount of gluten in it (they can call it "gluten-free" if it has less than 20 ppm gluten).

Even medications are not required by law to list ingredients, like gluten-derived ingredients, which makes things very, very difficult for celiacs when "food-grade starch" can come from rice, wheat, or corn.

And if something is not required by law (like, listing each and every ingredient), your insisting that I produce a law SAYING that it's not required is not helping the discussion along. You might as well ask me to produce a law saying that I am not required to wear chartreuse socks in public. It actually seems like you are purposely trying to derail the discussion by insisting on being shown a non-existent and therefore totally irrelevant law.

YOU show us the law that says that vaccine manufacturers are required to list each and every ingredient--including those that are used in processing--and please stop trying to get out of it by asking ME to produce a law of un-requirement.

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 


Again, I'm not the one making a claim. I have nothing to prove.

You have everything to prove.

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

The FDA link seems to imply that while the precise formula might be a trade secret, there's no reason why all ingredients wouldn't be listed (vs all ingredients and exact amounts). 

Translation:  Rrrrrachel seems to be saying that just because pharmaceutical companies are not required by the FDA to list every ingredient in their formulas, that doesn't mean that they don't do so. Out of the goodness of their hearts, of course.  Because they have such a strong track record of being honest, and caring about those whom their products have injured.

It also sounds like she is saying, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWyCCJ6B2WE

[prosciencemum]

What would be the benefit to the vaccine companies of hiding the peanut oil.

Also if its so easy to just not list stuff, how come they aren't hiding the thimerosol, or formaldehyde, or possible trace amounts of cells grown from an aborted fetus?

Going back to the original point - would the presence of unvaccinated children with peanut allergies disprove it?

[serenbat]

Originally Posted by Taximom5 

Translation:  Rrrrrachel seems to be saying that just because pharmaceutical companies are not required by the FDA to list every ingredient in their formulas, that doesn't mean that they don't do so. Out of the goodness of their hearts, of course.  Because they have such a strong track record of being honest, and caring about those whom their products have injured.

ah, maybe it's like ahhhhh, when vaccine manufactures need to play down safety because all us pesky people are questioning them-kind of heard something about that lately 

[Rrrrrachel]

I see no evidence the ingredient lists aren't complete. They specifically say they include inactive ingredients and growth medium, the two ways peanut oil has been purported to be used. Other controversial ingredients are known to be used as growth medium and adjuvants, including eggs. There's no reasonable motivation to use peanut oil and hide it.

If the ingredient lists aren't complete, the evidence would be readily obtainable. Why hasn't someone produced it?

Ultimately, like all the other vaccine issues, this comes down to weighing the evidence and making the decision you think is best for you and your family.

[Rrrrrachel]

From the CDC site on vaccine ingredients, linked up thread.

To find out what chemical additives are in specific vaccines, ask your healthcare provider or pharmacist for a copy of the vaccine package insert, which lists all ingredients in the vaccine and discusses any known adverse reactions.

So either the CDC was lying (which some folks will readily believe, I'm sure, which is fine), all doesn't mean all, or those ingredient lists really are complete.

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

From the CDC site on vaccine ingredients, linked up thread.
So either the CDC was lying (which some folks will readily believe, I'm sure, which is fine), all doesn't mean all, or those ingredient lists really are complete.

The CDC has been caught in lies before:

http://www.bolenreport.com/Mark%20Geier/foiasuit3.htm

[Rrrrrachel]

Like I said, everyone will have to weigh the evidence for themselves.

[Taximom5]

Here's a fascinating survey, apparently done by a Harvard student named Devi Lockwood in 2006, concerning vaccines and peanut allergy:

http://www.avoidingmilkprotein.com/vacandpea.htm

"This research project attempts to answer the question of (1) whether there is a difference between the incidence of peanut allergies in a group of children with a relatively low vaccination rate (80%) versus a group of children with a high vaccination rate (99%), and (2) whether there is a difference between the vaccination rates in a group of children with a high incidence (100%) of peanut allergies versus a group of children with a relatively low incidence (1%) of peanut allergies."

and the conclusion:
 

V. Conclusion
"This goal of this research project was to determine whether there is a difference between the incidence of peanut allergies in a group of children with a relatively low vaccination rate (80%) versus a group of children with a high vaccination rate (99%), and whether there is a difference between the vaccination rates in a group of children with a high incidence (100%) of peanut allergies versus a group of children with a relatively low incidence (approximately 1%) of peanut allergies."

"My original hypothesis was that there would be a statistically significant difference, indicating a possible link between vaccines and peanut allergies. The data collected in all three parts of this study unambiguously support the hypothesis. In the case of the peanut allergy surveys, there was a greater than 2% difference between vaccination rate in the nationwide group of children with peanut allergies and the national vaccination rate as reported by the CDC. The results of the data collected in the Vashon-Ridgefield case-control study are even more dramatic. The elementary school and middle school population in Vashon currently has a vaccination compliance rate of 80.2%, and a peanut allergy rate of only 0.3%. An elementary and middle school population of roughly the same size in Ridgefield currently has a vaccination compliance rate of greater than 99.9%, and a peanut allergy rate of 1.8% - six times larger than that of Vashon."
 

Oh, and in case anybody is worried about the 100-word limit, the author of the study gives permission to share this with anyone who is interested:

""Thank you so much for posting my survey! Using the data I collected, I was able to win first place at the regional science fair and qualify for states. I couldn't have done any of this without your help and generosity. I've attached the research report for my project. Please feel free to share it with anyone who's interested."  Devi Lockwood, 2006

[C is for Cookie]

This topic has become of interest to me now. DS is allergic to peanuts and treenuts. He had an allergic reaction a couple days before his first birthday trying some peanut butter on bananas. DS has an extremely selective and delayed vaccine schedule. At the time, he only had the DTaP vaccine. I only came up with a few conclusions on why he has allergies to peanuts and treenuts. Either 1) DTaP must be the culprit to his allergy or 2) I was on a raw vegan diet when he was 3 months old and it consisted of a lot of nut based recipes (I was nursing him) For some reason, I find it hard to believe that there is, in fact, peanut oil (which, YES, kids can get allergic to! I asked this to an immunologist and an allergist) in DTaP but on the otherhand, I wouldn't be surprised if there was. I don't know. This is sort of wishy-washy to me and would love to figure out the truth on this. It might put my mind to ease to figure out what caused his allergies but I would also be even more angry about vaccine ingredients not being shown when it should. 

[Rrrrrachel]

I'm curious how he came up with his results being statistically significant when there's no discussion of pvalues or what kind of inference he used.

[prosciencemum]

What kind of regional science fair did he win with this study? (I mean high school, college?).

[Marnica]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

What kind of regional science fair did he win with this study? (I mean high school, college?).

read the post again - it clearly says he was a Harvard student

[Taximom5]

She.  Not he.

[Taximom5]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

I'm curious how he came up with his results being statistically significant when there's no discussion of pvalues or what kind of inference he used.

Translation:  "I have to find a way to invalidate any and all research indicating a link between vaccines and peanut allergies."

(Taken in the context of the majority of the 2700+ posts on this forum that seem to be an attempt to invalidate any and all research indicating a link between vaccines and the severe adverse reactions reported following those vaccinations.  Or vaccines and autism.  Or vaccines and autoimmune disorders.  Or vaccines and bowel disorders.  Or vaccines and...)