or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Peanut oil in Vaccines causing massive peanut allergy?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Peanut oil in Vaccines causing massive peanut allergy? - Page 8

post #141 of 309
The several posts that came before it referring to the science project.
post #142 of 309

So from what I understand - excipients and adjuvants in pharmaceuticals (including vaccines) are considered proprietary information or trade secrets and DO NOT HAVE TO BE DISCLOSED. 

 

Peanut oil would fall into that category. So lets just all accept the POSSIBILITY that there are undisclosed ingredients in vaccines shall we?

 

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/99/2/268.full

 

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1314&dat=19881014&id=BFtWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=pe8DAAAAIBAJ&pg=4691,9896967

post #143 of 309
I don't think anyone denies the possibility.

I noticed the aap statement you linked was "retired" in 2004. Does anyone know what that means?
post #144 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I'm aware the adjuvant was patented by Merck (which I guess means its only in merck vaccines if anything), but that is very different from actually being in use. The not adjuvants licensed in the us are aluminum salts.

Is this an assumption what you wrote or do you have proof they did not use it? please share the evidence 

 

 

for those who have not seen this - caution to those who assume it never happened - just don't trouble yourself to read it http://vactruth.com/2010/07/15/non-disclosed-hyper-allergenic-vaccine-adjuvant/

post #145 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

So from what I understand - excipients and adjuvants in pharmaceuticals (including vaccines) are considered proprietary information or trade secrets and DO NOT HAVE TO BE DISCLOSED. 

 

Peanut oil would fall into that category. So lets just all accept the POSSIBILITY that there are undisclosed ingredients in vaccines shall we?

 

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/99/2/268.full

 

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1314&dat=19881014&id=BFtWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=pe8DAAAAIBAJ&pg=4691,9896967

 

I'm unclear on what you're arguing; I apologize.

 

It looks like most vax manufacturers do disclose ingredients: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipient-table-2.pdf

 

Are you suspecting that the disclosure is not complete and that there are still hidden ingredients?

post #146 of 309
Serenbat I'm saying that, in general, having a patent on something does not mean it's beig used. Companies patent a LOTof things that never make it to production or don't for decades.

Also, this patent seems like proof that peanut oil is NOT in non Merck vaccines, since that would be infringement on their intellectual property. Also, if it was in Merck vaccines they would NOT be able to claim trade secret to avoid listing it, since trade secrets and patented intellectual property are mutually exclusive.

Also, re marnicas post, as has been pointed out several times the CDC ingredient list explicitly says it includes inactive ingredients and excipients.
post #147 of 309
The link that marnica posted earlier

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/99/2/268.full#ref-2

Includes a reference to a list of specific inactive ingredients that don't have to be disclosed can anyone access it and see if peanut oil is actually on it? I will try when I get back to a bigger screen.

Here is the reference.

↵ Brown JL (1983) Incomplete labeling of pharmaceuticals: a list of “inactive” ingredients. N Engl J Med. 309:439–441. MedlineWeb of Science


Also thanks to marnica for posting that. It was helpful and informative.
post #148 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Serenbat I'm saying that, in general, having a patent on something does not mean it's beig used. Companies patent a LOTof things that never make it to production or don't for decades.

Also, this patent seems like proof that peanut oil is NOT in non Merck vaccines, since that would be infringement on their intellectual property. Also, if it was in Merck vaccines they would NOT be able to claim trade secret to avoid listing it, since trade secrets and patented intellectual property are mutually exclusive.

Also, re marnicas post, as has been pointed out several times the CDC ingredient list explicitly says it includes inactive ingredients and excipients.

so you have your speculation

 

and no proof to back up what you are asserting,  no evidence that can conclusively state they did not

post #149 of 309
Never mind, I found the database on the FDA website. Peanut oil is included, fwiw.

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/iig/getiigWEB.cfm
post #150 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


Also, this patent seems like proof that peanut oil is NOT in non Merck vaccines, since that would be infringement on their intellectual property.
 "Seems like proof"  What a clever way to phrase that!
Except--Merck's having a patent does not prove anything.  We have no idea whether or not other vaccine manufacturers purchased the adjuvant directly from Merck.  Any companies who purchased it from Merck would not have to list it, either (trade secret, or it may have been a condition of purchasing it in the first place, etc).
 
Also, if it was in Merck vaccines they would NOT be able to claim trade secret to avoid listing it, since trade secrets and patented intellectual property are mutually exclusive.
Trade secret and intellectual property are not mutually exclusive.
"Intellectual property rights include patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret rights."
 
post #151 of 309
Taxi you're wrong. Those are all sub types of intellectual property, but you can't declare something a trade secret if you've disclosed it and you have to disclose it to get a patent.

http://www.yale.edu/ocr/pfg/guidelines/patent/patent_vs_trade_secret.html
Quote:
Because of the disclosure requirements of patents and the secrecy requirements of trade secrets, these two forms of intellectual property usually cannot be maintained for any one particular technology. A choice either to patent or to maintain as a trade secret must be made.


This is interesting.

http://news.consumerreports.org/health/2012/03/qa-how-can-i-find-inactive-ingredients-in-prescription-medication.html
Quote:
"Every drug manufacturer is obliged to list every excipient, every little part including coloring and flavors for each drug," says Andrzej Wilk, PhD, senior scientific liaison to USP's Nomenclature, Safety and Labeling Expert Committee. "This can be found on the package of a prescription drug or in the drug's package insert. For over-the-counter drugs, inactive ingredients have to be on the outside of the box."
post #152 of 309
Also licensing the adjuvant to other companies would again negate trade secret rights, since they require a competitive advantage.

Also it's not a licensed adjuvant in the us.
post #153 of 309

So peanut oil has not been used in ANY vaccines- is that correct? 

AND there is no proof it ever was used?

 

headscratch.gif

post #154 of 309
I don't think anyone said that, serenbat.

What I will say is that I see no credible argument for peanut oil currently being in use in US vaccines, and I've seen no evidence it was ever used in US vaccines outside of possibly clinical trials (and I don't know that for sure), but based on what people have said I'm not ruling that out as completely as I'm ruling out current use.

It's not currently used as an adjuvant in the us. It's not protected under trade secret, and turns out they do have to list inactive ingredients.
post #155 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I don't think anyone said that, serenbat.

What I will say is that I see no credible argument for peanut oil currently being in use in US vaccines, and I've seen no evidence it was ever used in US vaccines outside of possibly clinical trials (and I don't know that for sure), but based on what people have said I'm not ruling that out as completely as I'm ruling out current use.

It's not currently used as an adjuvant in the us. It's not protected under trade secret, and turns out they do have to list inactive ingredients.

you keep saying US - do you mean it is being used in non-US and has been used in trials? it is an adjuvant just not in the US?

post #156 of 309
I mean I don't really know, honestly. I don't know the requirements for listing or not listing inactive ingredients or what adjuvants are licensed in the countries. The book that's been mentioned her several times on the "peanut allergy epidemic" claims it was and is used in the UK.

I don't know. My assessment is pretty much limited to the us.
post #157 of 309
Here's an online database of vaccine adjuvants. It will tell you which vaccines use that adjuvant and what countries it's licensed in. I haven't been able to find anything in it about peanut oildor adjuvant 65.

http://www.violinet.org/vaxjo/
post #158 of 309

So are we really saying peanut oil IS being used in pharmaceuticals,  just not in vaccines, and in the US?

post #159 of 309
Uh, no.
post #160 of 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Uh, no.

NO to what? It's not being used in pharmaceuticals? 

or NO to the US?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Peanut oil in Vaccines causing massive peanut allergy?