Can We Continue To Justify Injecting Aluminum Into Children? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 13 Old 04-26-2012, 04:34 AM - Thread Starter
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

 

Can We Continue To Justify Injecting Aluminum Into Children?

Slmommy likes this.
emmy526 is offline  
#2 of 13 Old 04-27-2012, 05:02 PM
 
Devaskyla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: in my great new home
Posts: 4,693
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

But vaccines are special, aluminum in them is magically safe and non-toxic. Vaccines never ever cause any harm, ever. Not even the expected harm just from the injection (based on the injuries caused by injections of everything besides vaccines) or from being mishandled or the wrong needles being used or manufacturing issues, etc....Vaccines never cause any harm.

 

Yes, I'm feeling somewhat annoyed and incredibly cynical lately.

Bokonon likes this.

mom to all boys B: 08/01ribboncesarean.gif,  C: 07/05 uc.jpg, N: 03/09 uc.jpg, M: 01/12 uc.jpg and far too many lost onesintactlact.gifsaynovax.gif

Devaskyla is offline  
#3 of 13 Old 04-27-2012, 06:56 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,928
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)

Hahaha, I feel the same way.

You see, if you ignore the issue, it makes it all go away. Instead of facing the evidence and  acknowledging the need for more research, you can just pretend that everything is alright. Say neat things like "vaccines have been proven safe" or they are "evidence based" and that means it's true!

 


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#4 of 13 Old 04-27-2012, 08:36 PM
 
littlest birds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: a dream-filled fixer-upper
Posts: 2,952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

The tiny kinds of aluminums are good guys. 

 

And whatever stupid reason infants' immune systems don't react strongly enough to vaxes without adjuvants to hype them up--well that's a flaw we can overcome because humans are so clever.  Don't assume that the responsiveness of an infant's immune system is just the right healthiest level. 

 

 

 

   


ME&treehugger.gifHE... loving our: wild.gifdd(18) ~~violin.gifds(13) read.gifdd(13)~~ peace.gifdd(10)
 
 

littlest birds is offline  
#5 of 13 Old 04-28-2012, 05:07 AM
 
Slmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 875
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I am going to put this info here too, I've already put it in another thread that is still going on, but since many people have concerns about aluminum in vax I'll put it here too:

 

 

Quote:
The total body burden of aluminum in healthy individuals is 30–50 mg. [adults]
...
The most sensitive target of aluminum toxicity is the nervous system. Impaired performance on neurobehavioral tests of motor function, sensory function, and cognitive function have been observed in animals.  Neurobehavioral alterations have been observed following exposure 
of adult or weanling animals and in animals exposed during gestation and/or lactation.
...
We do not know if children are more susceptible than adults to aluminum toxicity.

 

Quote:
 It is only when the GI barrier is bypassed, such as intravenous infusion or in the presence of advanced renal dysfunction, that aluminum has the potential to accumulate. As an example, with intravenously infused aluminum, 40% is retained in adults and up to 75% is retained in neonates.[4]

 

 

Quote:
Aluminum causes an oxidative stress within brain tissue.[8] Since the elimination half-life of aluminum from the human brain is 7 years, this can result in cumulative damage via the element's interference with neurofilament axonal transport and neurofilament assembly.
...
For example, among patients with osteomalacia, there has been a closely associated dialysis encephalopathy, which is thought to be caused by aluminum deposition in the brain.
...
 It has also been linked to vaccine-associated macrophagic myofasciitis and chronic fatigue syndrome, thus highlighting the potential dangers associated with aluminum-containing adjuvants as described recently.[13] 

 

 

Mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity and autoimmunity in pediatric populations

http://lup.sagepub.com/content/21/2/223.abstract

 

 

Induction of autoimmunity through bystander effects. Lessons from immunological disorders induced by heavy metals.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11334498?dopt=Abstract

 

 

Aluminium-adjuvanted vaccines transiently increase aluminium levels in murine brain tissue.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1608913?dopt=Abstract

 

 

 

Macrophagic myofasciitis lesions assess long-term persistence of vaccine-derived aluminium hydroxide in muscle.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11522584?dopt=Abstract

 

 

Aluminum inclusion macrophagic myofasciitis: a recently identified condition.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14753387?dopt=Abstract

 

 

Autoimmune hazards of hepatitis B vaccine.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15722255?dopt=Abstract

 

 

Vaccination-induced cutaneous pseudolymphoma.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15793512?dopt=Abstract

 

 

 

Slmommy is offline  
#6 of 13 Old 04-28-2012, 05:39 AM
 
sosurreal09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 3,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Don't forget the vitamin K shot is full of it too


 Young born-again mama and loving wife peace.gif to DH jammin.gif and SAHP to two crazy girls dust.gifwehomebirth.jpgfly-by-nursing2.gifslinggirl.giffamilybed1.gif and believe gd.giflactivist.gif  signcirc1.gif !

sosurreal09 is offline  
#7 of 13 Old 06-07-2012, 01:07 PM
 
amnesiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at the end of the longest line
Posts: 4,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Actually no, there is no aluminum in injectable vitamin K. There's no reason to have any adjuvant in it.
amnesiac is offline  
#8 of 13 Old 06-07-2012, 05:31 PM
 
nukuspot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,341
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

When I was doing midwifery we would get asked this a lot.  There is no aluminum in the IM vitamin K injection for newborns.  Why people think there is, I don't know?  Maybe there used to be?  Now, I personally still decline it for my babies (I do the oral, herbal version) because I still don't like the polysorbate 80, among other things (I did an extensive research project comparing the IM to oral vitamin K options--you can PM me if you are interested in reading the info on the oral) but I want to restate the fact that there is no aluminum in it.

 

 

Each 0.5 mL contains 1 mg phytonadione (Vitamin K1), 10 mg polysorbate 80, 10.4 mg propylene glycol, 0.17 mg sodium acetate anhydrous, and 0.00002 mL glacial acetic acid. Additional glacial acetic acid or sodium acetate anhydrous may have been added to adjust pH to meet USP limits of 3.5 to 7.0. The air above the liquid in the individual containers has been displaced by flushing with nitrogen during the filling operation.

 

http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/drugInfo.cfm?id=848


Midwife mama bellycast.gif to DD1 bouncy.gif (4.5) and DD2 h20homebirth.gif (1.5)
nukuspot is offline  
#9 of 13 Old 06-08-2012, 06:28 AM
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Aluminum worries me a lot...

 

While the K shot is free of Al, it does have all the nasty stuff listed by nukuspot. We always opted for the oral route, which is standard in my home country anyways (I love birthwithlove.com to buy it, super fast shipping). I opt out of vaccines that use polysorbate 80. 

nia82 is offline  
#10 of 13 Old 06-08-2012, 12:23 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,777
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)

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). 

 

And yes I do think tiny amounts of things are less dangerous than large amounts of things. I would happily overdose on homeopathic medicine.


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 online now  
#11 of 13 Old 06-08-2012, 01:17 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,202
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Prosciencemum, I see 2 possible flaws in that study.

1) What was studied were reports of "adverse events," which we know to be often unrecognized and unreported, and we're probably more so 8-10 years ago. Remember, most doctors are unaware that actions can occur days or even weeks after vaccination, and that autoimmune immune disorders may be slow to show up, even after they are triggered. University of Chicago published a study in 2010 that concluded that it took an average of ELEVEN YEARS to correctly diagnose celiac disease. So in 2004, if something like celiac disease was triggered by vaccines, it would likely have gone unrecognized and misdiagnosed.

2) the study was in 2004. If the children studied were receiving their shots in the late 1990's or early 2000's, they would have been receiving thimerosal-preserved shots--so, no, the researchers would not have seen a significant difference in adverse events, because the children were still receiving something that could have caused neurological and/or autoimmune problems.
Taximom5 is online now  
#12 of 13 Old 06-08-2012, 01:24 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,777
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)

Taximom - it was not a single study, but a Cochrane systematic review, which if I understand it correctly involves looking at all published studies out there on a topic and making a meta-analysis of the conclusions. 


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 online now  
#13 of 13 Old 06-08-2012, 01:33 PM
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cover letter he!!
Posts: 6,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Prosciencemum, I see 2 possible flaws in that study.

1) What was studied were reports of "adverse events," which we know to be often unrecognized and unreported, and we're probably more so 8-10 years ago. Remember, most doctors are unaware that actions can occur days or even weeks after vaccination, and that autoimmune immune disorders may be slow to show up, even after they are triggered. University of Chicago published a study in 2010 that concluded that it took an average of ELEVEN YEARS to correctly diagnose celiac disease. So in 2004, if something like celiac disease was triggered by vaccines, it would likely have gone unrecognized and misdiagnosed.

2) the study was in 2004. If the children studied were receiving their shots in the late 1990's or early 2000's, they would have been receiving thimerosal-preserved shots--so, no, the researchers would not have seen a significant difference in adverse events, because the children were still receiving something that could have caused neurological and/or autoimmune problems.

 

I've seen this posted several times, by several different people. Can I ask how it is known that a reaction is due to a vaccine when it shows up weeks later?

Super~Single~Mama is offline  
Reply

Tags
Vaccinations

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