or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Archives › Miscellaneous › Vaccinations Archives › Resources › "They took thimerosal out of vaccines in 1999" WRONG! Let's set the record straight
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"They took thimerosal out of vaccines in 1999" WRONG! Let's set the record straight - Page 2

post #21 of 43
Thread Starter 
continued . . .

March 2005
LA Times article in pdf


http://www.safeminds.org/pressroom/p...n-Vaccines.pdf

Drug maker Merck & Co. continued to supply infant vaccine containing a mercury-based preservative for two years after declaring that it had eliminated the chemical.

In September 1999, amid rising concern about the risks of mercury in childhood vaccines, Merck announced that the Food and Drug Administration had approved a preservative-free version of its hepatitis B vaccine.

"Now, Merck's infant vaccine line," the company's press release said, "is free of all preservatives."

But Merck continued to distribute vaccine containing the chemical known as thimerosal, along with the new product, until October 2001, according to an FDA letter sent in response to a congressional inquiry.

The thimerosal-containing supplies had expiration dates in 2002.
post #22 of 43
When I was deciding about vaxing ds#1 in 2001 I remember some info that they were supposed to stop manufacturing the MMR vax w/ thimerisol as of March 2001. I asked my doc about it and she said she removed them from the her shelves and only had the new. A year or so later there was a story that the vaccine manufacturer (don't know which one) did not actually remove the thimerisol but just changed the labeling. While it was discovered that they did this they were not penalized in any way. Does anyone else remember this happening? I didn't keep anything I read about it and haven't been able to find anything.
post #23 of 43
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbles
When I was deciding about vaxing ds#1 in 2001 I remember some info that they were supposed to stop manufacturing the MMR vax w/ thimerisol as of March 2001. I asked my doc about it and she said she removed them from the her shelves and only had the new.
Could you be thinking of another vax? It definitely wasn't the MMR - it's a live vaccine. Could it be Merck's Hep. B? Read my post just above yours and see if it sounds familiar. We posted at about the same time, so you probably missed it.
post #24 of 43
LI,
Here is the info i have on his vax record.
90700 1 DTP-1 DTaP 04/23/2002 DTPA542A2
90700 2 DTP-2 DTaP 06/24/2002 U0547DA
90700 3 DTP-3 DTaP 10/02/2002 STPA573B9

PV Polio Series
90713 1 IPV 04/23/2002 UO422-2
90713 2 IPV 06/24/2002 UO8224-2
90713 3 IPV 10/02/2002 UO199-2

HBV Hepatitis B
90748 1 HBV 04/23/2002 0934L
90748 2 HBV 06/24/2002 1366L
90748 3 HBV 02/26/2003 0741L

MMR
90707 1 MMR 02/26/2003 0857M

VAR Varicella
90716 1 VAR 02/26/2003 1296L

HIB Haemophilis Influenza B
90748 1 HIB 04/23/2002 0934L
90748 2 HIB 06/24/2002 1366L
90748 3 HIB 02/26/2003 0741L

PRV Prevnar
90669 1 Prev 04/23/2002 486-805
90669 2 Prev 06/24/2002 486-805
90669 3 Prev 10/02/2002 489-875
90669 4 Prev 02/26/2003 491-166


What I noticed is that he received the HIB, MMR, HepB ,varicella and prevnar all in one day. I thought they were not supposed to give more then one live virus at once. Isnt the chicken pox and mmr both live?

Also is the HIB a flu shot of some sorts? Does that mean it would have had the full thymerisol amount?
After typing this out I am so disgusted, with myself and the health dept. I dont beleive that they had gotten rid of all their vaccines that had thymerisol and I told them that they could have used up what they had and I wouldnt have known what we got unless I asked to see the inserts.

Can the manufacturers just change the label and not reduce the amounts?
post #25 of 43
LI,
will you post the info that you have in #9 post from "reading inserts" into this thread?

thank you.
tracy
post #26 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland
Could you be thinking of another vax? It definitely wasn't the MMR - it's a live vaccine. Could it be Merck's Hep. B? Read my post just above yours and see if it sounds familiar. We posted at about the same time, so you probably missed it.
could be the Hep B. thanks for that info. while i was confused about which vaccine, i am glad you posted that important info. i think people really need to know how deceitful the drug companies are.

i am a bit confused about the live vaccines. do they contain thimerisol or not?
post #27 of 43
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelaB
LI,
Here is the info i have on his vax record.
90700 1 DTP-1 DTaP 04/23/2002 DTPA542A2
90700 2 DTP-2 DTaP 06/24/2002 U0547DA
90700 3 DTP-3 DTaP 10/02/2002 STPA573B9

HBV Hepatitis B
90748 1 HBV 04/23/2002 0934L
90748 2 HBV 06/24/2002 1366L
90748 3 HBV 02/26/2003 0741L

HIB Haemophilis Influenza B
90748 1 HIB 04/23/2002 0934L
90748 2 HIB 06/24/2002 1366L
90748 3 HIB 02/26/2003 0741L

I thought they were not supposed to give more then one live virus at once. Isnt the chicken pox and mmr both live?

Also is the HIB a flu shot of some sorts? Does that mean it would have had the full thymerisol amount?

Can the manufacturers just change the label and not reduce the amounts?
Can you get the manufacturer of the Hib, Hep and DTaP? They have to note this information in your child's records.

They can give more than one live virus at a time. They actually just recently approved ProQuad, which is the MMR + chicken pox.

Hib doesn't have anything to do with influenza - I'll post some information on Hib for you.
post #28 of 43
Thread Starter 
Does the FDA follow the guidelines listed by the WHO? Does pharma use "preservative free" or "thimerosal free" on their packaging of vaccines with thimerosal in "trace" amounts?


I'm going to try to answer my own question. The CDC officially states:

Today, with the exception of some influenza vaccine, none of the vaccines used to protect preschool children against 12 infectious diseases contain thimerosal as a preservative. (Those with a concentration of less than 0.0002% contain what is considered “trace,” or insignificant, amounts.)

If the CDC considers vaccines containing trace amounts to have no thimerosal, then pharma is able to label it's packaging as both preservative free and thimerosal free. From what I remember, the label can make this claim, however, the package insert must state the trace concentration.
post #29 of 43
My son was born in Feb 2002 and received a mercury laced Hep B shot in the hospital when he was only 9 hours old. Three weeks later he started crying 5 hours a day every day until he was 5 months old. My son made all developmental milestones on time until me received the MMR and Varicella at 12 months. He stopped developing and after shots at 15 months became autistic. Anyone that thinks thimerosal is out of all vaccines need to think again. Flu shots for pregnant women and babies still have mercury(at least trace amounts if not full amounts)my daughter became autistic after a flu shot she received at 6 1/2 months. Shots for children going into kindergarten are not required to be thimerosal free either. I met some Moms at an autism conference last May that had kids that did not become autistic until they received booster vaccines to start kindergarten. Bottom line for everyone-educate before you vaccinate!
post #30 of 43
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbles
i am a bit confused about the live vaccines. do they contain thimerisol or not?
The MMR does not contain thimerosal. Let me know if you'd like to see the package insert.
post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongIsland
The MMR does not contain thimerosal. Let me know if you'd like to see the package insert.

Did the MMR ever have Thimerosol? Wasn't the Thimerosol in the MMR the center of the Autism and vaccines debate? Just trying to make sure I have all of my facts straight
post #32 of 43
Quote:
Did the MMR ever have Thimerosol? Wasn't the Thimerosol in the MMR the center of the Autism and vaccines debate? Just trying to make sure I have all of my facts straight
no.

thimerasol is apart of the debate regarding autism but it was not in the mmr.
post #33 of 43
post #34 of 43
I added that link from the other thread.

why are there so many spellings for it?
Anyway..I find its entire tone interesting..minimizing the risks..worrying about "changing the formulation having an impact on efficacy"...a bit condesending.

But thru the muck...if you are in a situation where you choose to vax...or feel like you may be running out of of immediate options...and you are looking for a thimerosal free product..because while you argee there are many controversies..and other ingredients and issues that cause concern..it appears if you read the inserts and choose from a very abbreviated list..you appear to be able to have a thimerosal-free product.


Thiomersal elimination indicates that thiomersal is not used at any stage of production. Such product is considered as a thiomersal - free vaccine. Reduction of thiomersal means that thiomersal is used at some stage of vaccine production but its amount has been reduced in comparison with the amount in the already licensed vaccine. Reduction of thiomersal, even if significant, results in residual levels of thiomersal and such a product is not considered to be a thiomersal - free vaccine. Adopted by the 53rd meeting of the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization, 17-21 February 2003. A definitive
version of this document, which will differ from this version in editorial but not scientific detail, will be published in the WHO
Technical Report Series.
post #35 of 43
54321 ~ I hope you take this the right way..

the reason there are so many spellings is that americans insist on spelling many things differently to the rest of the world.

Thiomersal was never in mercury and the fact that some people said it was is testimony to the fact that people on both sides of the argument can jump to conclusions.

But I've never argued the "MMR causes autism because of the thiomersla in it" because I knew it never did... BUT up until 2001 in this country kids would get MMR in one arm, and two other vaccines in the other which did have thiomersal in them, so it wouldn't have mattered if MMR had had it in or not. The children still got thiomersal at the same time, just from different needles.
post #36 of 43
I think I took it the right way..It took me awhile 6 yrs ago to learn to spell it..and I guess it just really pops when I see it spelled alternately.
I've known the MMR did not contain it..which is why the autism debate..which I see a couple a threads a few pages back I'd like to check out..is confusing.
Thimerosal is only 1 piece of the puzzle in my opinion...I think it is a really big piece..but only a piece.
I also worked with 2 children that had autism..one had "gut issues" and his mother believes those issues were connected to the MMR.
It has been along time but I have read some of Andrew Wakefield opinions..I will check out those discussions a few pages back.
post #37 of 43
Thread Starter 
post #38 of 43
I also know a doc that once they learned, or rather now knew the pubilc knew about the thimerisol, still used up all old vaxs on the shelves to the kids whose parents didn't ask. then when that supply was used up, they went with the "thimerisol free" (still not right) stock. sad and unethical.

also, off topic, but does anyone know why some docs give shots in the arms and others in the legs? my first dd always got hers in her legs until we stopped vaxing. What is the difference?
post #39 of 43
Ok, I'm confused now! I came here to find out about this very topic.

My SIL delayed vax until her kids were 5 and 7. Then she started doing a standard vax schedule in late 2004/2005, under the belief that thimerosal had been removed from the vaccines. Then she heard that many still contained thimerosal so at the next visit she asked to see the package insert. Sure enough, it was listed (not sure for which vax) and so she declined and has done no further shots since then. She's kicking herself for not having read the inserts from the beginning.

Here's the thing: Her ped's office says they get new vax shipments every month. So this shouldn't have been old stock. Does this mean the thimerosal was likely only a trace amount, rather than a preservative? How can she find out -- using the lot numbers?

Thanks!
post #40 of 43
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by alamama
Does this mean the thimerosal was likely only a trace amount
Yes.

Here is a list of thimerosal concentrations: http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm

Those vaccine formulations with a[*] contain what the government calls "trace" amounts:

* This product should be considered equivalent to thimerosal-free products. This vaccine may contain trace amounts (<0.3 mcg) of mercury left after post-production thimerosal removal; these amounts have no biological effect. JAMA 1999;282(18) and JAMA 2000;283(16).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Resources
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Archives › Miscellaneous › Vaccinations Archives › Resources › "They took thimerosal out of vaccines in 1999" WRONG! Let's set the record straight