Studies demonstrating HPV vaccine is both safe and effective - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 218 Old 11-10-2012, 04:29 PM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm not the one with the unsubstantiated claim.
Mirzam likes this.
pek64 is offline  
#32 of 218 Old 11-10-2012, 04:48 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Well you warned me! smile.gif
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#33 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 12:30 AM
Administrator
 
cynthia mosher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Arabia!
Posts: 38,849
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)

Personal attacks and petty picking at each other will result in you being removed from the forum. Please back off and talk about the subject, not the person. If you don't want to post information to participate more fully in the discussion that's fine. Just step out. But don't continue with personal bicker posting.


cynthia mosher is offline  
#34 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 08:40 AM
 
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 prosciencemum View Post

 I actually wonder sometimes if the processed food companies, especially in the US, aren't laughing about all the fuss there is on vaccine safety, while there seems to be much less fuss about the real concerns over the gallons of high fructose corn syrup most children in the US eat annually, or the dubious animal rights practices of the people who produce the cheap meat most people happily buy from the supermarkets. It seems much more likely to me that the rise in chronic health issues (if it's even a rise in actual occurance rather than a rise in diagnosis) that many seem keen to link to vaccines are actually more likely related to poor nutrition and reliance on processed foods. But that's off topic. 

 

So your assumptions are based on negative stereotypes about how children are fed in the U.S.?  That's not scientific at all, and not true.  

 

And even if what you say is the case, wouldn't that mean that you believe that the processed food companies are part of a vast conspiracy, the kind that you say could not be possible for vaccine manufacturers? 

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#35 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 02:26 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,058
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

 

 

 

And even if what you say is the case, wouldn't that mean that you believe that the processed food companies are part of a vast conspiracy, the kind that you say could not be possible for vaccine manufacturers? 

Lol.

 

I am not thrilled with frankenfood, however….

 

No one is saying I must or must not serve my kids frankenfood for them to go to school

No one is screaming that I am a selfish conspiracy nut who does not understand science based on whether I do or do not serve frankenfood.

rachelsmama and BeckyBird like 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  
#36 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 03:23 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Beause there is a large body of science supporting bad food being bad for you.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#37 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 03:36 PM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Crap food sells well, regardless of what anyone says about it
So, there's no need to insist you must feed it to your children in order to send them to school. But last time I checked, crap food was what the school provides for lunch for the students. I guess the school officials don't pay attention to large bodies of scientific evidence.
BeckyBird likes this.
pek64 is offline  
#38 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 03:50 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 Rrrrrachel View Post

Beause there is a large body of science supporting bad food being bad for you.

 

And yet it's bought and sold, and marketed to children.


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#39 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 03:55 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,451
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Beause there is a large body of science supporting bad food being bad for you.

 

Oh really? Here's some "scientific" research that shows high fructose corn syrup is not bad for you, from a nice industry sponsored website.

 

http://sweetsurprise.com/hfcs-science-and-research

 

HFCS SCIENCE AND RESEARCH

So what does the science say? While media and blog headlines have slammed high fructose corn syrup, scientists and experts have been evaluating the controversy and coming to different conclusions. Their view? Research shows HFCS, sugar and other sweeteners are basically the same from a health perspective. They have the same number of calories, are metabolized the same, and have the same impact on the feeling of fullness.

 

 

Here we have Coca Cola Company Beverage Institute for Health and Wellness [sic] telling us how good aspartame is for us. They have a nice section for health professionals.

 

http://www.beverageinstitute.org/en_us/pages/beverage-aspartame.html

 

Quote:

Consumer safety concerns regarding aspartame often stem from a misunderstanding of its metabolism, and animal studies that have been misinterpreted to infer that aspartame could increase hunger and food intake. However, the National Cancer Institute and an independent international expert review panel have confirmed that aspartame does not cause cancer, seizures or other health problems, and an evidence-based research review by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics confirms aspartame does not increase in appetite or food intake. Aspartame is permitted for use in more than 100 countries worldwide including India and is one of the most thoroughly studied food ingredients in the world. Aspartame is found in table top sweeteners like Equal®.

 

 

 

Here is yet another industry sponsored web site, with the unapologetic name of aspartame.org extolling the many virtues of aspartame. 

 

http://www.aspartame.org/

 

 

Quote:

Aspartame is one of the most thoroughly studied food ingredients ever, with more than 200 scientific studies supporting its safety. In addition to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization, the Scientific Committee on Food of the European Union (SCF), and regulatory agencies in more than 100 countries have reviewed aspartame and found it to be safe for use.

 

This kind of industry sponsored marketing propaganda is no different to what the pharma industry does with vaccines.

BeckyBird likes this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#40 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 04:02 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

And yet it's bought and sold, and marketed to children.

I don't think I understand your point.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#41 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 05:06 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 Rrrrrachel View Post


I don't think I understand your point.

 

My point is that there are thousands of people involved in the production and marketing of junk foods and beverages that most people know are harmful.  They do this with clear conscience.  Yet one poster contends that it would be impossible for an industry to be successful at making a product that they know is dangerous, because it is the kind of conspiracy that would be too great to execute.

BeckyBird and kathymuggle like this.

A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#42 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 05:11 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

those foods aren't harmful in small amounts, though, and the fact that they are harmful in large amounts is not a secret.  I don't think the claim about impossibility was about producing harmful products, there are many many products that would disprove that claim, but somehow keeping the fact that it was harmful a secret despite scrutiny by many many different parties.

Rrrrrachel is offline  
#43 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 05:23 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,451
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)

Aspartame is, by far, the most dangerous substance on the market that is added to food. And they knew it in 1974. No conspiracy here. Move on.

BeckyBird likes this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#44 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 05:27 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

According to dr mercola.

Rrrrrachel is offline  
#45 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 05:54 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,451
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

According to dr mercola.

You think he was just making this up? He was just reporting the facts. Here's another "messenger":

 

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/sweet-misery-a-poisoned-world/

 

 

 

 

Quote:

Aspartame is an artificial sweetener, an additive. And it’s a chemical. It’s not a natural product, it’s a chemical. The molecule is made up of three components. Two are amino acids, the so-called building blocks of protein.

One is called Phenylalanine, which is about 50% of the molecule and the other is Aspartic Acid, which is like 40%. And the other 10% is so-called Methyl Ester, which as soon as it’s swallowed becomes free methyl alcohol. Methanol. Wood alcohol, which is a poison. A real poison.

 

You are now defending aspartame in the very same way you defend vaccines? 

BeckyBird likes this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#46 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 05:59 PM
 
Jennyanydots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think drawing the parallel between big pharma and the food industry is appropriate. We're talking about giant corporations that have to serve their own financial interests. These are not touchy feely organizations that care about ethics and children's welfare. They have a responsibility to their shareholders to push for ever increasing profits, to the full extent that they are legally able (and sometimes beyond). That anyone thinks it would EVER be ok to let these companies take part in creating legislation or safety checking their own products just blows my mind. It's not conspiracy per se, it's business as usual.

chicken3.gif mama to two teens and two tots partners.gif madly in love with DP guitar.gif

Jennyanydots is offline  
#47 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 06:01 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

You think he was just making this up? He was just reporting the facts. Here's another "messenger":

 

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/sweet-misery-a-poisoned-world/

 

 

 

 

 

You are now defending aspartame in the very same way you defend vaccines? 

 

I am not defending aspartame, although I think his head line is really overstating things.  I'm just pointing out your source

Rrrrrachel is offline  
#48 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 06:09 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,451
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

You think he was just making this up? He was just reporting the facts. Here's another "messenger":

 

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/sweet-misery-a-poisoned-world/

 

 

 

 

 

You are now defending aspartame in the very same way you defend vaccines? 

 

I am not defending aspartame, although I think his head line is really overstating things.  I'm just pointing out your source

 

 

So you were engaging in typical pro vax MO? I know who the source was, because I posted it, the information was correct.

BeckyBird and kathymuggle like this.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#49 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 08:54 PM
 
emma1325's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Beause there is a large body of science supporting bad food being bad for you.

 

Does  healthy food prevent disease?  And if so, why do you believe the government does not mandate healthy food for children?


Loving mother, Devoted Wife
emma1325 is offline  
#50 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 10:17 PM
 
pers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

You think he was just making this up? He was just reporting the facts. Here's another "messenger":

 

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/sweet-misery-a-poisoned-world/

 

 

Quote:

Aspartame is an artificial sweetener, an additive. And it’s a chemical. It’s not a natural product, it’s a chemical. The molecule is made up of three components. Two are amino acids, the so-called building blocks of protein.

One is called Phenylalanine, which is about 50% of the molecule and the other is Aspartic Acid, which is like 40%. And the other 10% is so-called Methyl Ester, which as soon as it’s swallowed becomes free methyl alcohol. Methanol. Wood alcohol, which is a poison. A real poison.

 

 

 

 

What's with the "so-called" qualifier before "building blocks of protein?"

 

Methanol is very toxic in large amounts and can make you go blind or even kill you.  Water can also be harmful in very large amounts.  But in very small aounts, such as found in aspartame or apple juice or some fruits, your body can handle it just fine.  

pers is offline  
#51 of 218 Old 11-11-2012, 11:50 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,902
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)

Defending aspartame? What a shame.

 

 

"The idea that “the dose makes the poison” relies on the assumption that the higher the dose of any particular chemical, the greater its toxic effect on living organisms. However, this assumption is not always correct." 

http://www.actionbioscience.org/environment/trautmann.html


 
 
 "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  
#52 of 218 Old 11-12-2012, 05:00 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)
This is the vax forum. Discussions of aspartame belong in Nutrition or Health&Healing, depending on the aspect you want to investigate. Get back on track, and as Cynthia already mentioned, play nicely.

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  
#53 of 218 Old 11-12-2012, 10:06 AM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pers View Post



What's with the "so-called" qualifier before "building blocks of protein?"

Methanol is very toxic in large amounts and can make you go blind or even kill you.  Water can also be harmful in very large amounts.  But in very small aounts, such as found in aspartame or apple juice or some fruits, your body can handle it just fine.  

Water is necessary for life. Methanol is not. Your post is simple misdirection.

Vaccinations are not necessary for life, *in the same way as water*. In other words, if you could guarantee that you never come in contact with a virus, you would survive without a single vaccination. That is a fact.

The question of this thread is where are the studies, actual studies showing the numbers, supporting the claim that HPV vaccinations are safe.
pek64 is offline  
#54 of 218 Old 11-12-2012, 12:33 PM - Thread Starter
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post

Water is necessary for life. Methanol is not.

But that wasn't the point of pers post. S/he was pointing out that in large quantities even something as safe as water is dangerous. While in small quantities things which sound nasty can be tolerated.

For example there is a trace amount of methanol in the air you're breathing right now. Me too.

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  
#55 of 218 Old 11-12-2012, 01:50 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,902
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post


 in large quantities even something as safe as water is dangerous. While in small quantities things which sound nasty can be tolerated.
 

 

This is not always true. My previous post:

"The idea that “the dose makes the poison” relies on the assumption that the higher the dose of any particular chemical, the greater its toxic effect on living organisms. However, this assumption is not always correct." 

http://www.actionbioscience.org/environment/trautmann.html


 
 
 "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  
#56 of 218 Old 11-12-2012, 03:24 PM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

But that wasn't the point of pers post. S/he was pointing out that in large quantities even something as safe as water is dangerous. While in small quantities things which sound nasty can be tolerated.
For example there is a trace amount of methanol in the air you're breathing right now. Me too.

You are missing *my* point.

Before I try again to make my point, water is only harmful if a very large quantity is drunk in a short period of time.

Methanol is *not* necessary for life, no matter if we can avoid it or not. And likening toxins to water is misdirection. Care to focus on vaccination safety now?
pek64 is offline  
#57 of 218 Old 11-13-2012, 10:26 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

Here's a document with some great info about HPV vaccine, including a thoroughly cited rundown of various adverse events and the rates at which they occur.

 

http://www.rho.org/files/CCA_HPV_vaccine_safety.pdf

 

Among other things, the rate of less-serious adverse events like fainting are not more common with HPV than other vaccines given to adolescents, and are likely a result of the injection process rather than the vaccine.  Women with no other risk factors do not show an increased risk of GB, VTE, or serious allergic reactions.  This is a secondary source, but it conveniently puts a lot of information in one place and is extensively cited.

Rrrrrachel is offline  
#58 of 218 Old 11-13-2012, 12:13 PM - Thread Starter
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Pek64 - I disagree that it's not relevant to vaccine safety. I think it's fundamental to understand that things which in large quantities are dangerous in smaller quantities can be safe.

Beckybird - thanks for that link. I finally found time to read it properly. It's really interesting, and an important point that different people and age groups will have different levels of sensitivity to toxic substances.

But the fundamental point which the article does not disagree with is that eventually the dose will be small enough to be safe.

And the point is that doses of toxic substances in vaccines, which no one will disagree are there, are small enough that in almost all people they are completely harmless.

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  
#59 of 218 Old 11-13-2012, 03:25 PM
 
minerva23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: down by the riverside
Posts: 477
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Pek, the idea is the other components have already been determined to be safe or have a known rate of adverse events. There is no evidence that the other components of hpv cause an unusually high rate of serious adverse events, including things like fainting.


The adjuvant used in Gardasil is a new one that has not really been tested but just assumed to be safe. Check out AAHS.


“The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.”
―Socrates

minerva23 is offline  
#60 of 218 Old 11-14-2012, 09:05 AM - Thread Starter
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minerva23 View Post


The adjuvant used in Gardasil is a new one that has not really been tested but just assumed to be safe. Check out AAHS.

 

I'm not sure that's true. Where did you read that? AAHS stands for "Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate" - this is a type of aluminium salt. This website (http://www.rxlist.com/gardasil-drug.htm) says that a 0.5mL dose of HPV contains 225 mcg of aluminium from this source. I didn't yet find any information to suggest this is a new type of aluminium salt which is being used. 

 

 I also found this interesting article from the European Medicines Agency about the process for safety testing new adjuvants for vaccines which seemed relevent to the thread (summary - it sounds hard to get a new adjuvant in a vaccine meant for healthy people) http://www.emea.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003809.pdf

 

 This website (http://www.patentlens.net/daisy/adjuvants/Background/Adjuvant_types.html) talks about how aluminium salts have been used as adjuvants since the 1930s. 

Rrrrrachel likes this.

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  
Reply

Tags
The Hpv Vaccine Controversy Sex Cancer God And Politics A Guide For Parents Women Men And Teenagers , Hpv And Cervical Dysplasia A Naturopathic Approach Woodland Health Series , The Vaccine Book Making The Right Decision For Your Child Sears Parenting Library , Dont Vaccinate Before You Educate , The Cutter Incident How Americas First Polio Vaccine Led To The Growing Vaccine Crisis , The Virus And The Vaccine Contaminated Vaccine Deadly Cancers And Government Neglect

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