Aluminum Adjuvants in Vaxes Cause Risk: New Study - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-04-2013, 11:52 AM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/1/prweb9146755.htm

 

 

 

Quote:
   In adult humans aluminum vaccine adjuvants have been linked to a variety of serious autoimmune and inflammatory conditions, yet children are regularly exposed to much higher amounts of aluminium from vaccines than adults;
dinahx is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-04-2013, 12:35 PM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
A study that apparently studied nothing.
DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-04-2013, 12:38 PM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Care to elaborate? Because the DeStefano study that the ProVax was enraptured by didn't actually do anything but analyze old data either, so that is supposed to be just fine . . . 

dinahx is offline  
Old 05-04-2013, 12:40 PM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm just saying...this study didn't actually study the effects of aluminum adjuvants at all. It doesn't even specify what kind of adjuvants, salts or what. I'm not sure how valuable this piece of literature is. Do you find it particularly compelling? I'm open to admitting I'm missing something.
DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-04-2013, 12:43 PM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

There is only one type of Aluminum Adjuvant in common use in Western Vaxes . . . 

dinahx is offline  
Old 05-04-2013, 12:53 PM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Right...I know. But there is not only one type of aluminum adjuvant period. I think my point is that they didn't actually study the effects of any specific vaccine or adjuvant at all.
DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-04-2013, 01:02 PM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I think it is safe to assume that they are talking about the Aluminum Adjuvant that is actually in use in our Vax Supply, rather than a type of Adjuvant that is not in use in our Vax Supply.

dinahx is offline  
Old 05-04-2013, 01:03 PM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Really? Who knows? Does it even matter, since they didn't actually study any adjuvants at all?
DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-04-2013, 02:03 PM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
They studied the mechanism. If the study is totally illegitimate how did it get into a peer reviewed journal?
dinahx is offline  
Old 05-04-2013, 02:12 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)

Sadly peer review does sometimes fail. Why the "Journal of Lupus (and related diseases)" I wonder.... 

 

PS. this is an article from 2011. I imagine you can find reviews (pro and skeptically reviewing it) online if you do a bit of Googling... 


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  
Old 05-04-2013, 05:20 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 2,033
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Sadly peer review does sometimes fail. Why the "Journal of Lupus (and related diseases)" I wonder.... 

 

 

Has "peer reviewed" ever failed when the results favored vaccines? How do we know when and when not to trust the peer review?


 
 
 "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  
Old 05-04-2013, 05:20 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 2,033
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)

.


 
 
 "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  
Old 05-04-2013, 05:21 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 2,033
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)

pushed submit button too many times.....lag fail


 
 
 "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  
Old 05-04-2013, 11:47 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post

Has "peer reviewed" ever failed when the results favored vaccines? How do we know when and when not to trust the peer review?

It is a big problem for science. But peer review is better than no peer review, and the bigger journals tend to be more careful.

In the long run the junk science gets forgotten or proven wrong by the mainstream. That's why it takes multiple different results to change mainstream views in science. Why a single study which claims a problem doesn't undo decades of use of adjuvants with a very good safety record.

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  
Old 05-05-2013, 04:49 AM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post


It is a big problem for science. But peer review is better than no peer review, and the bigger journals tend to be more careful.

In the long run the junk science gets forgotten or proven wrong by the mainstream. That's why it takes multiple different results to change mainstream views in science. Why a single study which claims a problem doesn't undo decades of use of adjuvants with a very good safety record.

 

Especially a single study that didn't actually study adjuvants.

DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 07:14 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

It is a big problem for science. But peer review is better than no peer review, and the bigger journals tend to be more careful.

In the long run the junk science gets forgotten or proven wrong by the mainstream. That's why it takes multiple different results to change mainstream views in science. Why a single study which claims a problem doesn't undo decades of use of adjuvants with a very good safety record.

Unfortunately, it's not that simple.

The bigger journals are Pharma-funded. There is immense conflict of interest when publication control is in the hands of the industry producing the products being "studied."

Those bigger journals are the ones who published all those studies that the Cochrane Review deemed to be of poor quality.

I think there is a lot more corruption in the pharmaceutical industry--which has a huge effect on the entire field of medicine--than in your field.
Taximom5 is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 07:29 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
There may be some corruption in medical science - where large amounts of money are at stake I accept some people will act immorally. But I cannot believe its at the level it would need to be at to make the kind of vaccine safety coverup some people who post here and elsewhere seem to believe in.

That would involve keeping hundreds, if not thousands of scientists quiet. In my opinion suggesting that that is possible is as daft as suggesting the moon landings could be faked and that that would be kept quiet. Or that we're hiding contact with aliens.....

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  
Old 05-05-2013, 08:27 AM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

There is definitely more than one study suggesting harm from Aluminum Adjuvants and too few studies conclusively proving safety. This study is not the foundation on which I rest my feelings of harm from these Adjuvants, it is just one I hadn't seen before.

 

DHinJersey, you are basically trolling and are now being reported. I was happy to engage in debate with you yesterday, but now you have made fun of one poster and thrown out a lame 9/11 bit, attacking a position of some other poster that is totally irrelevant to this thread.

dinahx is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 08:34 AM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

There is definitely more than one study suggesting harm from Aluminum Adjuvants and too few studies conclusively proving safety. This study is not the foundation on which I rest my feelings of harm from these Adjuvants, it is just one I hadn't seen before.

 

DHinJersey, you are basically trolling and are now being reported. I was happy to engage in debate with you yesterday, but now you have made fun of one poster and thrown out a lame 9/11 bit, attacking a position of some other poster that is totally irrelevant to this thread.

It's not irrelevant at all. Anyway, I've made multiple valid points in this thread that couldn't possibly be considered trolling.

DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 08:37 AM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

There is definitely more than one study suggesting harm from Aluminum Adjuvants and too few studies conclusively proving safety. This study is not the foundation on which I rest my feelings of harm from these Adjuvants...

 

I hope not, because it's a pretty flimsy foundation. Maybe you'd like to share some other studies on aluminum adjuvants that you feel support your position.

DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 08:51 AM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not with you, because I have reported about 6 of your posts. Your mission here seems just here to attack and undermine and not to engage in serious discussion. Even some of our most ardent ProVax posters don't engage in the type of rapid fire attack posting (without actually adding any links, etc) that you are engaging in and it is really busting up the intellectual & respectful tone of this forum for me.

I would be happy to share those studies once management has a chance to deal with your posting style. <3
dinahx is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 09:00 AM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I can't rule out 'Online Reputation Management' on these forums, but when anger & rapid fire posting of personal attacks seem to be the style, it makes me especially wary of engaging with any poster who I suspect may have ties to industry or ProVax groups outside this forum. I expect everyone here to be just parents, who may be incidentally employed, but do not represent any Vax related interests including groups like NVIC or Shot @ Life. If I suspect otherwise, I disengage.
dinahx is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 09:06 AM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm a community college English professor. Given our household finances I would gladly sell out to pharma, antivax, or any other monied interests. But alas, I'll just go right on drawing my meager salary until they call.

I do strongly believe that antivaxers are a serious threat to the public health, but only through ignorance, not malice.
DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 09:11 AM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well I can't engage in a discussion with someone who believes my family is 'a serious threat to public health because of ignorance' especially when Coca Cola & Marlboros & RoundUp are flying off the shelves & that is not being considered a threat.

The idea in this forum is that we are all great parents grappling with one of the most serious & complex issues of our day, in which there are two valid perspectives.

The beginning of good debate is respect. I am not feeling any respect coming from your posts so far.
dinahx is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 09:17 AM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It isn't personal. Anyone who is provax believes that antivaxers are a threat to public health, by definition. Antivaxers believe that vaccines are a threat to public health and that we help perpetuate that threat by vaxing and supporting big pharma.

That's why these threads get so heated.
DHinJersey is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 09:25 AM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That is not true. We don't even necessarily use the term 'antivax' in here. It is political & does not encompass the complexity of the issue, like 'antichoice'. It is not true that every ProVax person in here believes that Vax Abstainers are a threat to public health. First, 100% compliance is not required for even the most ardent herd immunity believers. Secondly, some folks just believe that Vaccines are the best choice for THEIR child!

Some of us are actually parents of Vax Injured children. My child specifically had a very clear, severe reaction, listed on the package insert of the Vaccine involved. That is when I started reading Primary Vax Research & being very disappointed by how little was known about the mechanism of this fairly common reaction.

I don't believe those who Vax are threats to Public Health. I believe in the sanctity of individual life & that Vax decisions are best made on an individual level, considering individual health. I do believe that the current state of Vaccine Research is lacking (placebos, true control groups, etc)
dinahx is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 09:40 AM - Thread Starter
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Bottom line, I don't believe that ProVax posters are IGNORANT, I believe they have access to the same data set and interpret it differently than I do. One cannot have a good debate or discussion with someone they believe is IGNORANT.

dinahx is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 11:41 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

There may be some corruption in medical science - where large amounts of money are at stake I accept some people will act immorally. But I cannot believe its at the level it would need to be at to make the kind of vaccine safety coverup some people who post here and elsewhere seem to believe in.
.

Then you don't understand the economics and the politics in the US.

It's ridiculously simple to keep people quiet when speaking out is equivalent to professional suicide,

I have scientists and doctors as friends, and in my family as well. They all say the same thing: there is an understanding that they must not speak out in any way against the pharmaceutical industry; to do so would jeopardize their funding, their grants, their employment.
Taximom5 is offline  
Old 05-05-2013, 11:47 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,229
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 229 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post



I don't believe those who Vax are threats to Public Health. I believe in the sanctity of individual life & that Vax decisions are best made on an individual level, considering individual health. I do believe that the current state of Vaccine Research is lacking (placebos, true control groups, etc)

I do think some vaccine practices might be a threat to public health.

 

2 examples off the top of my head:

 

-The reduction in wild chicken pox, as caused by the vaccine, is very strongly linked with the upswing in shingles.

 

-There is a link between females getting mumps and having a lower risk of Ovarian cancer (will find study if any requests)

 

So, people vaccinating does increase my risk of both shingles (as I have had CP and am not getting the immune boost I would have in the pre-vaccine era) and risk of Ovarian cancer - because I never had a chance to get the mumps.  

 

The kicker, though, is I don't think the above matters in the final analysis. Parents are going to make the best health decision they can for their child.  I think anyone screaming about herd immunity and selfishness really has to look at their own choices - the choice to vaccinate also affects public health and not always in good ways.  


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  
Old 05-05-2013, 12:51 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,068
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 54 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

I do think some vaccine practices might be a threat to public health.

2 examples off the top of my head:

-The reduction in wild chicken pox, as caused by the vaccine, is very strongly linked with the upswing in shingles.

-There is a link between females getting mumps and having a lower risk of Ovarian cancer (will find study if any requests)

So, people vaccinating does increase my risk of both shingles (as I have had CP and am not getting the immune boost I would have in the pre-vaccine era) and risk of Ovarian cancer - because I never had a chance to get the mumps.  

The kicker, though, is I don't think the above matters in the final analysis. Parents are going to make the best health decision they can for their child.  I think anyone screaming about herd immunity and selfishness really has to look at their own choices - the choice to vaccinate also affects public health and not always in good ways.  

I'll add some more ways vaccines can harm public health:

1. The rise in vaccine-resistent meningitis serotypes.
2. Vaccine-induced polio from OPV.
3. False sense of confidence/lax public health practices from low-effectiveness vaccines.
4. Increased cases of extremely dangerous adult chicken pox due vaccine wearing off after purported 14-year duration.
5. "Flu-like illness" resulting directly from the influenza vaccine.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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