Selecting and scheduling vaccines - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 57 Old 09-06-2012, 06:42 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Country Girl View Post

I am really interested in hearing from people who believe in vaccination, but make "mindful" and considered choices about which and when.  I will post this sentiment in several areas, but it seems that much of the discussion even in this section is dominated by people trying to convince others to avoid vaccinating. 

 

 

 

This was pretty much your first line.  You set the tone for defensiveness.  There are plenty of threads on this subforum that are not debate-ish or difficult, but you cannot come in swinging and making controversial statements and expect a nice, peaceful thread. In my opinion, you need to take some ownership of the tone and debate on this thread. The following are further examples:

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Country Girl View Post

ma2two- are you a selective vaccinator yourself with advice on which brands are safest?  Or are you anti-vax, trying to prove I won't find safe vaccines?  

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Country Girl View Post

I'm glad to give a recommendation to the pediatrician to anyone in the SF peninsula. Just PM me. As for "not being helpful" or "harming people researching the vaccine question", if I were to respond or make equivalent remarks about anti-vaxers, I would probably be accused of all sorts of things, so I will refrain from sharing the responses that come to mind. I did not say that I had no knowledge of what vaccines she generally uses, but that I was not interested in getting unsolicited Internet assessments of the vaccines' make-up. I apologize if my "additive free" remark is not quite accurate and raised hackles as "dangerous" additives are one of the primary justifications for not vaccinating.... I really wish that the Selective Vaccination Forum had more comments from "mindful vaccinators" (as mothering suggested we be called) and less from anti-vaxers pushing their perspective or jumping on any chance to criticize. It seems to be the point of this forum. I would be nice if I could share my relief in a successful vaccine appointment without the certainty that someone would try to poke holes in it to promote their own agenda. I guess I should write the moderators if they don't notice on their own.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Country Girl View Post

I yield, even though I said I did not want to debate specifics.  There is not a secret miracle DTaP with no additives.  I misspoke (as I have already conceded).  My Pediatrician gets all AVAILABLE additive free vaccines and trace or low in others.  She uses Daptacel.  So if we are saying .33 mgs of aluminum is not low, I do not know how to respond except for unless you have tested your breast milk for aluminum content, none of us are sure they are not getting as much just from your environment.  I do not think all questions are just questions, though; some are clear set ups for debate.  As for defensiveness, I am still hoping this forum can be a source for selective vaccinators to discuss their choices, not just defend them.  My happy (and clearly not specific enough) post about my vaccine appointment led to debate instead.  I will make sure to choose my words more carefully next time I post on the vaccine forum.

 

By the way, if there are others who are genuinely curious, I found out that late summer and early fall are the high time for pertussis, which is why I got this vax first.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Country Girl View Post

 

 

 

 

What additives are you referring to?  There are preservative free vaccines.  Your post (your 3rd above) tells us their are some that do not use aluminum.  We know that there are some that are thimerosal free vaccines.  Are you saying none are free of both or are there other additives you are referring to?.  And the pretense of "confusion" in order to criticize is not cute.  What exactly is your objective with the continuing questioning and challenging?  You are part of the majority on these boards.  Do you want to chase off other opinions?  Just make sure no misstatements (like mine in the first post you commented) go unchallenged?  Personally, I just rubbed you the wrong way?  Which is it?  

 

Still hoping there are some more actual Selective Vaccinators out there and this is just not one more site of debate on the Vaccine boards.  I thought there was a place for that.  I have seen people called out for initiating debate on the Not Vaccinating forum.  Why is it OK here and not there?

 

1.  If you want a support thread, say "support only"

2.  Even on support threads, if you say something like "additive free vaccines" people are going to question you on it.  It is an excellent question for this subforum.  Maybe you know something they don't, or maybe you are incorrect (and hey, it happens, owning up to it in a clear way is the fastest way to move on) but getting to the bottom of "additive-free vaccines" is very relevant.

3.  if you really feel this thread is inappropriate, flag it.  

4.  Re:  the bolded. Both you and TCMoulton have called people out on this thread for challenging (fairly nicely, I might add) your incorrect statement.  Pro-vaxxers call non-vaxxers or their statements out all the time on the non-vax forum.  I can give you examples, if you like.  I think the bolded is bull.

5.  Yes, you are in a minority voice at the moment on MDC.  About 2 months ago, there were many more pro-vax voices.  There have been periods when non-vax voices were more quiet.  There is an ebb and flow to this - pro vaxxers will be back. You can wait it out if you like.   


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#32 of 57 Old 09-06-2012, 09:38 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ma2two View Post

 

I think to most people, anything that is not the antigen would be considered an additive. You might run into less confusion if you specify aluminum when you mean aluminum, and thimerosal when you mean thimerosal. Of course there are vaccines that are both aluminum and thimerosal free, as live virus vaccines cannot contain either ingredient. They still can contain MSG, fetal bovine serum, antibiotics, human DNA, etc.

 

Blogs aren't the greatest way to do research. Google Scholar is a good resource. With the keywords injected aluminum, there were 187,000 results.

 

Injected aluminum as an adjuvant in vaccines may be a necessary evil, but it should not be downplayed by comparing it to ingested aluminum in breastmilk.

 I agree with the bolded. I think it is very important to differentiate between ingredients when talking about vaccines. The OP has referred to Aluminum as a preservative. It is not a preservative - it is an adjuvant. There are other preservatives used in vaccines besides thimerosal such as phenol, Benzethonium chloride and 2-phenoxyethanol. Some folks may have issues with some of these preservatives and not others. Additives is a very generic term IMO. it basically refers to everything else in the vaccine besides the antigen. So technically there is no such thing as an additive free vaccine so labeling something as such can be misleading.

 

as for the whole aluminum injecting vs ingesting - according to  the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, we absorb less than one percent of the aluminum we swallow and according to the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry between 50 and 70 percent of the injected aluminum adjuvants in vaccines is excreted within 24 hours. comparing injecting something and ingesting something always bothers me as well. It's like comparing apples to toothpaste IMO. Aluminum is neurotoxic and IMO  there is plenty of evidence to suggest this is the case.

"All salts of aluminum are poisonous when injected subcutaneously and intravenously" - Dr. Victor Vaughn Toxicologist from The University of Michigan when he was testifying before the federal trade commission in 1927.

 

I found this presentation by Dr. Ayoub very interesting

http://drtenpenny.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Aluminum-part-1.pdf

BeckyBird likes this.

If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#33 of 57 Old 09-07-2012, 04:14 AM
Administrator
 
cynthia mosher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Arabia!
Posts: 28,821
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)

Just want to remind everyone of the forum guidelines:

 

 

 

Quote:
The Selective and Delayed Vaccination forum hosts discussion for parents who have made the decision to vaccinate their children (or are making that decision and want information about selective and delayed vaccination) and are seeking the best approach possible. While we will not restrict posting in this forum only to members who have chosen to vaccinate, we will restrict posting to specific information that is appropriate for the forum purpose and the thread topic posted.

This forum is not a place to argue against selective or delayed vaccination or debate vaccination in general. Such discussions are already hosted in the main Vaccinations forum and posts in that vein are most welcome and appropriate there. Our purpose for this forum is to provide information that is helpful for parents who have made the decision to vaccinate and are not seeking discussion against their decision but rather support and information to help them proceed in the best manner. Please respect this and post at all times with this in mind. Should you have any questions about the appropriateness of your post for this forum feel free to PM the forum moderator.

 

The OP fits perfectly in this forum. However, I'll agree that the defensive tone set in the first post was not conducive to a comfortable atmosphere. 

 

I haven't seen any posts arguing against selective or delayed vaccination or debating vaccination in general. The questions asked of the OP are valid. Clarifying ingredients of a vaccine is important in this forum and of importance not only to those participating in the discussion but to all of our members and guests reading the thread. 

 

Please avoid posting in a way that casts suspicion on or questions someone's intent. If we (moderators) have concern about the behavior of someone posting we will handle that directly in the thread or personally in PM. If you post to do so yourself then you may create an even bigger issue and derail the thread entirely. 

 

Thanks everyone. Now, back to the discussion. smile.gif


cynthia mosher is online now  
#34 of 57 Old 09-07-2012, 07:55 AM
 
MamaMunchkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Country Girl

By the way, if there are others who are genuinely curious, I found out that late summer and early fall are the high time for pertussis, which is why I got this vax first.



You might still want to be vigilant - DTaP has about 80% efficacy after 3 shots, and unknown for fewer. 

More here - they advise parents/caregivers get Tdap as precaution:
http://www.immunize.org/askexperts/experts_per.asp

For anyone else who considers DTaP, the link above also warns of possible confusion of DTaP/Daptacel and Tdap/Adacel  - the packaging used to look similar but has been modified to reduce errors ...

Also, it looks like Tripedia has been discontinued recently, only Daptacel and Infanrix in the US.
 


Pro rights (vaxes).
MamaMunchkin is offline  
#35 of 57 Old 09-07-2012, 11:17 AM
 
ma2two's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaMunchkin View Post

You might still want to be vigilant - DTaP has about 80% efficacy after 3 shots, and unknown for fewer. 

More here - they advise parents/caregivers get Tdap as precaution:
http://www.immunize.org/askexperts/experts_per.asp

Also, it looks like Tripedia has been discontinued recently, only Daptacel and Infanrix in the US.

 

I noticed your link said 80-85% efficacy after 3 shots, but it didn't give a reference for that. I wonder if the efficacy is really that high, with all the pertussis outbreaks these days that the CDC admits has nothing to do with unvaccinated kids.  Also, the pertussis vaccine can't prevent infection or transmission. It is just designed to lessen the severity of the cough. (The vaccine works against the toxin that the bacteria produce, not the actual bacteria, which can still be caught and transmitted).

 

I know the standard recommendation is for parents and caregivers to get the Tdap to protect babies, but the vaccine manufacturer says, "It is unknown whether immunizing adolescents and adults against pertussis will reduce the risk of transmission to infants."

http://www.vaccineplace.com/support/brochure/adacelpatientbrochure.pdf (page 5)

 

Where did you get the info about Tripedia being discontinued? If it's true, I think that's good, as it contains mercury.

ma2two is offline  
#36 of 57 Old 09-07-2012, 12:37 PM
 
MamaMunchkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 355
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)

Dont know where immunize.org gets their numbers - my guess is CDC.  Same figures in the Pink Book - under "Immunogenicity and Vaccine Efficacy"

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/pert.html

 

I agree with the efficacy rates issues etc ... another thread another time though .... 

 

The point is the OP's worried about fall/winter - but it's unknown how much protection an infant gets after the 1st shot ...  it's something to consider when/if one does DTaP.

 

About Tripedia ...

http://www.ashp.org/DrugShortages/NotAvailable/Bulletin.aspx?id=764

www.mass.gov/eohhs/docs/.../vaccine-management-dtap-daptacel.pdf

 

The Tdap recommendation ... interesting ... don't want to hijack the thread though ... some other time ...


Pro rights (vaxes).
MamaMunchkin is offline  
#37 of 57 Old 09-07-2012, 12:45 PM
 
ma2two's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by MamaMunchkin View Post

 

About Tripedia ...

http://www.ashp.org/DrugShortages/NotAvailable/Bulletin.aspx?id=764

 

 

Good to know. Thanks!

ma2two is offline  
#38 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 11:50 AM
 
MommatoGray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

This is exactly why we have lost so many awesome membes on MDC. Too bad we can't all be mamas who do our best for our kids to the best of our ability. And be examples for them and not judge others. Sad really.

MommatoGray is online now  
#39 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 12:05 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,729
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)

Might not help this thread, but aluminium in vaccines is mostly likely nothing to worry about since the levels are so low compared to typical environmental exposure from other sources (mostly food packaging I think).  

 

For example a Cochrane Systematic review in 2004 (this one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14871632) found no difference in the rates of children with neurological problems between those who had had a DTP vaccine with or without an aluminium adjuvant.

 

Most vaccines have less than 0.5 mg of aluminium adjuvant in them (there is a table here: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content-nw/full/112/6/1394/T3). The average adult ingests 1-10 mg of aluminium daily (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1490425). 


Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#40 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 05:01 PM
 
japonica's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canada-->Australia
Posts: 979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

I'm starting on a S&D route, and I DO find it something to worry about. I also don't equate ingested aluminum with injected aluminum. Tomljenovic and Shaw have written about the pharmacokinetics of ingested vs. injected. Notably that only about 0.25% of dietary aluminum is absorbed into systemic circulation (Yokel et al 2008) but that aluminum from vaccines may be absorbed at a rate of 100% (Yokel et al 2001). They also examine the types of aluminum used in the various studies and look at how the different compounds (chloride, hydroxide, lactate) affect neurological outcomes.

 

I'm not a chemist. Or a neuroscientist. What I wish is that there was a good, solid, credible review of Tomljenovic and Shaw's work done (not just snipes via comments on pro-vax blogs) where someone can address (or refute) point by point the conclusions they have come to. That would help me evaluate whether or not there is inherent risk of permanent injury in injected aluminum hydroxide, not just the old advice (said by Offit as well) that I probably eat more aluminum in a day anyway, so don't worry about it. It does concern me and it affects my decision. 


Mother to DD#1  s/b @40w 2003 for unknown reasons; DD#2   9.5 years old; DS  6 years old 
  Why are daughters protected but not sons?
 
 
 
  
japonica is online now  
#41 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 05:55 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by japonica View Post

I'm starting on a S&D route, and I DO find it something to worry about. I also don't equate ingested aluminum with injected aluminum. Tomljenovic and Shaw have written about the pharmacokinetics of ingested vs. injected. Notably that only about 0.25% of dietary aluminum is absorbed into systemic circulation (Yokel et al 2008) but that aluminum from vaccines may be absorbed at a rate of 100% (Yokel et al 2001). They also examine the types of aluminum used in the various studies and look at how the different compounds (chloride, hydroxide, lactate) affect neurological outcomes.

 

I'm not a chemist. Or a neuroscientist. What I wish is that there was a good, solid, credible review of Tomljenovic and Shaw's work done (not just snipes via comments on pro-vax blogs) where someone can address (or refute) point by point the conclusions they have come to. That would help me evaluate whether or not there is inherent risk of permanent injury in injected aluminum hydroxide, not just the old advice (said by Offit as well) that I probably eat more aluminum in a day anyway, so don't worry about it. It does concern me and it affects my decision. 

 

Not to mention that an infant getting many vaccines (at 2 and 4 months) is not likely to be consuming packaged food or anything but breastmilk or formula.


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#42 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 06:25 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 148 Post(s)

Japonica…have you read what Sears said on aluminum?

 

http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/vaccines/vaccine-faqs

Bokonon likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#43 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 06:55 PM
 
AmandaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

That was a great read!


lactivist.gifnovaxnocirc.gif Acd.gif'ing, winner.jpg,familybed1.gif,femalesling.GIFread.gif Momma to one DD 1/1/12 ribboncesarean.gif. Trying to goorganic.jpg and hoping for a hbac.gif next time!

AmandaT is offline  
#44 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 07:04 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Japonica…have you read what Sears said on aluminum?

 

http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/vaccines/vaccine-faqs

 

My DD was given HepB at under 6 lbs. at 36.5 weeks.  :(  I should have been more informed (or at least a little bit informed), but it's unforgivable that the doctor that I trusted thought it was ok.


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#45 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 07:16 PM
 
japonica's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canada-->Australia
Posts: 979
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Japonica…have you read what Sears said on aluminum?

 

http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/vaccines/vaccine-faqs

 

Yes, I have, quite a while ago. I remember that piece from The Vaccine Book. I wish he'd update it. Not so much because I value his insight (I'm more meh on Sears) but just to keep the discussion going. I hope that at the very least, he'd take a look at the material Tomljenovic and Shaw are publishing and put his two cents in. Offit went on record to say that their paper on adjuvants should never have been published. Not because of bad science apparently--it was peer reviewed and I guess if he feels the standards at Curr Med Chem are slipping then it's something he can take up with them. No, it's surmised he objected because the aluminum issue doesn't deserve investigation. 

 

Sears has mentioned, along with Shaw and others, that there are a significant number of unanswered questions on this particular topic. So, if, as many contend, that the aluminum adjuvants are completely inert and "safe," then I wish they would produce the specific, definitive, peer-reviewed, high-quality science that refutes all of the so-called negative associations between aluminum and neurotoxicity and/or autoimmunity and show us, indeed, that we parents are concerned for no reason whatsoever. I'm actually quite surprised this hasn't been done yet. They have the resources to undertake the work.


Mother to DD#1  s/b @40w 2003 for unknown reasons; DD#2   9.5 years old; DS  6 years old 
  Why are daughters protected but not sons?
 
 
 
  
japonica is online now  
#46 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 07:27 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

 

My DD was given HepB at under 6 lbs. at 36.5 weeks.  :(  I should have been more informed (or at least a little bit informed), but it's unforgivable that the doctor that I trusted thought it was ok.

And my DS#1 was given HepB at 4 1/2 pounds at 37 weeks (I had pre-eclampsia, hyperemesis, and he was IUGR).  He was very alert for the first 4 hours of his life, until they gave him the shot.  He didn't open his eyes for 5 days after the shot.

 

Our ped didn't even know about it, as it was the hospital nurses who gave the shot, not our ped.


With DS#2, the ped added a note to the chart that we would not be vaccinating in the hospital, and I told ALL the nurses and OBGYN's as well.

 

They gave him the HepB vax while I was in the shower, with neither my knowledge nor my permission.


They had me sign the consent form after the fact.  When I showed them the very clear note on the chart, they shrugged, said, "oops, sorry, but you still have to sign, because we already did it."

Taximom5 is offline  
#47 of 57 Old 10-04-2012, 07:29 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by japonica View Post

 

 

Sears has mentioned, along with Shaw and others, that there are a significant number of unanswered questions on this particular topic. So, if, as many contend, that the aluminum adjuvants are completely inert and "safe," then I wish they would produce the specific, definitive, peer-reviewed, high-quality science that refutes all of the so-called negative associations between aluminum and neurotoxicity and/or autoimmunity and show us, indeed, that we parents are concerned for no reason whatsoever. I'm actually quite surprised this hasn't been done yet. They have the resources to undertake the work.

They may contend that aluminum adjuvants are competely inert and "safe," but that doesn't make it so.

 

In fact, the more that they insist that it's fine, just fine, don't worry your pretty little head about it, you leave the worrying to to us DOCTORS--the more we notice the stench of something really rotten.

Taximom5 is offline  
#48 of 57 Old 10-09-2012, 01:41 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,729
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)

You don't need to believe someone - you can look at the science about aluminium adjuvants (and consider the amount in vaccines too). Here are some notes/facts I've collected about aluminium to get you started. 

 

 

Aluminium salts are found vaccines to improve immune response, and allow less of the immune response making agent to be included in the vaccine.

 

Aluminium is the 3rd most abundant element on Earth's surface, and in everything around us. It's in many foods - and used as an additive (processed cheese, pancake mix for example). It's also in breast milk.

 

At age 6 months a fully vaccinated baby will have had - 4mg from vaccine, breast milk 10 mg (formula 30 mg, soy formula 100 mg). 

 

100% absorbed from vaccination, 1% from ingestion. Aluminum is eliminated (but not completely).

End of 1st year - aluminium accumulation from breast milk and vaccine is comparable (0.1 mg)

 

Aluminium is demonstrably dangerous - but only in people with kidneys not working well and in presence of big doses of aluminium. 

 

 

A Cochrane Systematic review in 2004 (this one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14871632) found no difference in the rates of children with neurological problems between those who had had a DTP vaccine with or without an aluminium adjuvant.

 

Most vaccines have less than 0.5 mg of aluminium adjuvant in them (there is a table here: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content-nw/full/112/6/1394/T3). The average adult ingests 1-10 mg of aluminium daily (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1490425). 


Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is offline  
#49 of 57 Old 10-09-2012, 03:54 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Prosciencemum, have you even bothered to read Dr. Sears' article on aluminum, linked above? He thoroughly debunks the points you have tried to make on the supposed safety of aluminum in vaccines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Most vaccines have less than 0.5 mg of aluminum adjuvant in them.

But 0.5 mg of mercury is far higher than what is considered safe. According to the FDA, "Research indicates that patients with impaired kidney function, including premature neonates [babies], who received parenteral levels of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day, accumulate aluminum at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity [for a tiny newborn, this toxic dose would be 10 to 20 micrograms, and for an adult it would be about 350 micrograms]. Tissue loading may occur at even lower rates of administration."

According to Dr. Sears, "Using the 5 mcg/kg/day criterion from the first document as a minimum amount we know a healthy baby could handle, a 12-pound 2-month-old baby could safely get at least 30 micrograms of aluminum in one day. A 22 pound one-year-old could get at least 50 micrograms safely. Babies with healthy kidneys could probably handle a lot more than this, but we at least know they could handle this amount. However, these documents don't tell us what the maximum safe dose would be for a health baby or child. And I can't find such information anywhere. This is probably why the A.S.P.E.N. group suggests, and the FDA requires, that all injectable solutions have the 25 mcg limit, since we at least know that is safe."

Hib (PedVaxHib brand only) - 225 micrograms per shot.
Hepatitis B - 250 micrograms.
DTaP - depending on the manufacturer, ranges from 170 to 625 micrograms.

Pneumococcus - 125 micrograms.
Hepatitis A - 250 micrograms.
HPV - 225 micrograms.
Pentacel (DTaP, HIB and Polio combo vaccine) - 330 micrograms.
Pediarix (DTaP, Hep B and Polio combo vaccine) - 850 micrograms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post



A Cochrane Systematic review in 2004 (this one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14871632) found no difference in the rates of children with neurological problems between those who had had a DTP vaccine with or without an aluminium adjuvant.

"This is especially surprising because the Cochrane group didn't actually study aluminum metabolism itself. They didn't test aluminum levels in kids after vaccination. They didn't explore whether or not the amount of aluminum in vaccines builds up in the brain or bone tissues. They just looked for evidence of visible symptoms of toxicity without even looking for internal aluminum effects. And they didn't even do their own research. They simply reviewed all available studies done by other people. Also, they only looked at one aluminum-containing vaccine instead of testing all four at once. The Cochrane group essentially closed the book on aluminum without ever really opening it."
Taximom5 is offline  
#50 of 57 Old 10-09-2012, 05:04 AM
 
WildKingdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 684
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Prosciencemum, have you even bothered to read Dr. Sears' article on aluminum, linked above? He thoroughly debunks the points you have tried to make on the supposed safety of aluminum in vaccines.
But 0.5 mg of mercury is far higher than what is considered safe. According to the FDA, "Research indicates that patients with impaired kidney function, including premature neonates [babies], who received parenteral levels of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day, accumulate aluminum at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity [for a tiny newborn, this toxic dose would be 10 to 20 micrograms, and for an adult it would be about 350 micrograms]. Tissue loading may occur at even lower rates of administration."
According to Dr. Sears, "Using the 5 mcg/kg/day criterion from the first document as a minimum amount we know a healthy baby could handle, a 12-pound 2-month-old baby could safely get at least 30 micrograms of aluminum in one day. A 22 pound one-year-old could get at least 50 micrograms safely. Babies with healthy kidneys could probably handle a lot more than this, but we at least know they could handle this amount. However, these documents don't tell us what the maximum safe dose would be for a health baby or child. And I can't find such information anywhere. This is probably why the A.S.P.E.N. group suggests, and the FDA requires, that all injectable solutions have the 25 mcg limit, since we at least know that is safe."
Hib (PedVaxHib brand only) - 225 micrograms per shot.
Hepatitis B - 250 micrograms.
DTaP - depending on the manufacturer, ranges from 170 to 625 micrograms.
Pneumococcus - 125 micrograms.
Hepatitis A - 250 micrograms.
HPV - 225 micrograms.
Pentacel (DTaP, HIB and Polio combo vaccine) - 330 micrograms.
Pediarix (DTaP, Hep B and Polio combo vaccine) - 850 micrograms.
"This is especially surprising because the Cochrane group didn't actually study aluminum metabolism itself. They didn't test aluminum levels in kids after vaccination. They didn't explore whether or not the amount of aluminum in vaccines builds up in the brain or bone tissues. They just looked for evidence of visible symptoms of toxicity without even looking for internal aluminum effects. And they didn't even do their own research. They simply reviewed all available studies done by other people. Also, they only looked at one aluminum-containing vaccine instead of testing all four at once. The Cochrane group essentially closed the book on aluminum without ever really opening it."

 

Uh, that's what the Cochrane group DOES. They review existing studies. They don't do their own research. Why is that some sort of indictment of them?
WildKingdom is offline  
#51 of 57 Old 10-09-2012, 10:47 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post

 

Uh, that's what the Cochrane group DOES. They review existing studies. They don't do their own research. Why is that some sort of indictment of them?

 

Uh, because they "closed the book" on aluminum by declaring, "Despite a lack of good-quality evidence we do not recommend that any further research on this topic is undertaken."  The existing studies were woefully inadequate, and they said so.  So to base a conclusion (not recommending any further research on aluminum in vaccines) on admittedly inadequate research is equally inadequate.

 

Hopefully, as more and more studies ARE showing serious problems linked with aluminum in vaccines, the Cochrane group will revisit this subject, and reverse their previous conclusion.

Mirzam likes this.
Taximom5 is offline  
#52 of 57 Old 11-19-2012, 12:11 AM
 
phathui5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,474
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

And my DS#1 was given HepB at 4 1/2 pounds at 37 weeks (I had pre-eclampsia, hyperemesis, and he was IUGR).  He was very alert for the first 4 hours of his life, until they gave him the shot.  He didn't open his eyes for 5 days after the shot.

 

Our ped didn't even know about it, as it was the hospital nurses who gave the shot, not our ped.


With DS#2, the ped added a note to the chart that we would not be vaccinating in the hospital, and I told ALL the nurses and OBGYN's as well.

 

They gave him the HepB vax while I was in the shower, without neither my knowledge nor my permission.


They had me sign the consent form after the fact.  When I showed them the very clear note on the chart, they shrugged, said, "oops, sorry, but you still have to sign, because we already did it."

 

Wow. You certainly didn't have to sign a form for a procedure they performed without your consent.


Midwife (CPM, LDM) and homeschooling mama to:
13yo ds   10yo dd  8yo ds and 6yo ds and 1yo ds  
phathui5 is offline  
#53 of 57 Old 11-19-2012, 10:09 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by phathui5 View Post

 

Wow. You certainly didn't have to sign a form for a procedure they performed without your consent.

It was 4 hours after I gave birth, my husband had had to leave for work, and I had not slept in over 48 hours, so I wasn't exactly functioning at the top of my game.

 

But you are right, and, in retrospect, I certainly wish I hadn't signed.

Taximom5 is offline  
#54 of 57 Old 11-19-2012, 11:30 AM
 
Chicharronita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: In the Candyland of my Imagination
Posts: 1,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)

Reading about your hospital experiences makes me sad, Taximom5. 


Chicharronita is offline  
#55 of 57 Old 11-28-2012, 08:49 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)

Chicha, I think the saddest part is that my experiences are not unique--and that many have had far worse experiences than mine.

 

Something else sad is that, after posting some of my experiences here, I've received a pm making fun of me, and have seen members here go to another board to make fun of me.  That certainly adds to the difficulty.

applejuice likes this.
Taximom5 is offline  
#56 of 57 Old 11-28-2012, 07:15 PM
 
Chicharronita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: In the Candyland of my Imagination
Posts: 1,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)

I wish I were surprised, but sadly I'd heard about other forums that mock MDC members. 

 

I'm sure there are a lot of vaccine reaction deniers who wish people like you would be quiet, but they underestimate the sincerity and dedication of parents of whose children are harmed by things that are supposed to be only beneficial.

 

This is why people like Jenny McCarthy can command a lot of public attention and sympathy, while seemingly paid vaccine promoters like Amanda Peet don't.


Chicharronita is offline  
#57 of 57 Old 11-29-2012, 06:15 AM
 
Mosaic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: La vida loca
Posts: 4,005
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hey gang, remember that this is in the Mindful Vaccination forum now, so comments should be support-only.

Mi vida loca: full-time WOHM, frugalista, foodie wannabe, 10+ years of TCOYF 

 

R-E-S-P-E-C-T spells BRAND NEW User Agreement!!

Mosaic is offline  
Reply

Tags
Delayed Vaccination , Selective Vaccination

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off