Minnesota bans formaldehyde in children products -vaccines exempt - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 30 Old 09-12-2013, 08:13 AM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)

This is from vactruth.  If it makes you ragey, just skip it.  

 

I did  try to find a mainstream source that spoke on vaccines, Minnesota and formaldehyde and failed.  Sometimes you simply cannot find what you want in a mainstream source - not because what you are saying is untrue (Minnesota did ban formaldehyde in children's product and vaccines are exempt) but because the mainstream is fairly pro-vax it sees no problem in vaccines being exempt from such things.

 

http://vactruth.com/2013/09/08/cancer-causing-formaldehyde/

 

It harkens back to when thimerosal was banned by the UN last year - except where vaccines are concerned, of course.  


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  
#2 of 30 Old 09-12-2013, 09:17 AM
 
Dakotacakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Here is the BIll:

 

http://legiscan.com/MN/text/HF458/id/798361

 

It is correct The bill bans formaldehyde in children's products EXCLUDING: food, beverages, dietary supplements, pharmaceutical products.  It is basically designed to stop the sale of Bubble bath containing formaldehyde and BPA in plastic products.

 

The vax truth article is incorrect however saying that they don't want to have babies put something with formaldehyde in their mouths.  If that was the case they would also ban giving children mushrooms and pears (which both have MUCH MUCH more formaldehyde than vaccines as has been stated multiple times).  It isn't just vaccines that are exempt it is multiple items that have been through other safety checks.  FDA oversees the items excluded (food, beverage, and pharmaceuticals).  The only exemption that could prove problematic is Dietary supplements which have NO oversight and are now given an exemption under this bill.

Dakotacakes is offline  
#3 of 30 Old 09-12-2013, 10:53 AM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)

Babies at 2, 4 and 6 months typically do not eat pears or mushrooms  - but they are injected with vaccines that have formaldehyde.

 

If I were researching this, I would want to know: 

 

Do we have a safe daily limit for formaldehyde in infants?  

 

Do multiple injections on one day exceed it?

 

I will try seeing if I can come up with some concrete numbers on the above questions in the next few days.


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  
#4 of 30 Old 09-12-2013, 11:05 AM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)

It seems we have done formaldehyde recently:

 

http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1379311/shocking-revelation-about-formaldehyde-in-pears-its-120-times-more-than-in-a-vaccine

 

In any event, the intent of my posting wasn't to discuss formaldehyde (although I am game and don't care if the thread goes that way) my point is that it often seems there is agreement by powers that be that a substance is yucky…except where vaccines are concerned.  

 

Formaldehyde - not good - acceptable in vaccines

mercury - not good - acceptable in vaccines

aluminum - not good - acceptable in vaccines.


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  
#5 of 30 Old 09-12-2013, 12:13 PM
 
Dakotacakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

No 2 4 and 6 month old's do not eat pears and mushrooms.  However, the bill is not specific to infants.  It defines children as anyone 8 years old or younger.  Children 2-8 most definitely do eat Mushrooms and Pears.  Both of which have far more formaldehyde than vaccines.

 

My point was also not to debate Formaldehyde or mercury or aluminum but rather the bill in question here.  It isn't just Vaccines that are exempt.  It is foods, beverages, pharmaceuticals (including vaccines) and dietary supplements.  Part of the reason is that beverages, pharmaceuticals and foods are covered by other regulatory bodies.  I am not sure why dietary supplements aren't included because I don't think they do have any oversight

 

Just to correct:

 

Formaldehyde...not good in bubble bath....acceptable in mushrooms, pears, vaccines, and a host of other food products regulated by other agencies.

 

I won't get into mercury (and the distinction between types) or aluminum to avoid derailing the discussion of the MN legislation.

applejuice likes this.
Dakotacakes is offline  
#6 of 30 Old 09-12-2013, 12:37 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,246
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
I know of more babies that started solid food at 4 months than didnt. I don't agree with starting solids that early but it does happen and puréed pears are available at any grocery store that sells baby food.

Certainly at 6 months a lot of babies eat pears since that's when the AAP recommends introducing solid foods. Not everyday, but then Again you don't get vaccines everyday either.

Yes yes I know you don't inject baby food but you don't inject baby products either...

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#7 of 30 Old 09-12-2013, 12:53 PM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post

I know of more babies that started solid food at 4 months than didnt. I don't agree with starting solids that early but it does happen and puréed pears are available at any grocery store that sells baby food.
 

That is not recommended, though, as you say.

 

People do wash their kids with formaldehyde containing products, but that is not really a great idea, either.

 

I think the questions in post three are key to knowing if formaldehyde in vaccines is safe.  

 

I also wonder if:

-it makes a difference if the formaldehyde is synthetic or naturally occurring

-it makes a difference whether it is injected or injested.  I know many pro-vaxxers say no, non-vaxxers say yes, but what does the science (not skeptic or natural news type sites) say???

 

I

applejuice 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  
#8 of 30 Old 09-12-2013, 01:08 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,246
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

That is not recommended, though, as you say.

People do wash their kids with formaldehyde containing products, but that is not really a great idea, either.

I think the questions in post three are key to knowing if formaldehyde in vaccines is safe.  

I also wonder if:
-it makes a difference if the formaldehyde is synthetic or naturally occurring
-it makes a difference whether it is injected or injested.  I know many pro-vaxxers say no, non-vaxxers say yes, but what does the science (not skeptic or natural news type sites) say???

I

From looking online a lot of the guidelines say to start at 4-6 months.

http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/Many-Moms-Not-Following-Expert-Advice-on-When-to-Give-Solid-Foods-to-Babies.aspx

This study showed that 40 percent of moms started their baby on solids before 4 months.

Many doctors still recommend starting them at 4 months and even within the AAP it gives conflicting information. Sometimes they say 6 months and sometimes they say anywhere from 4-6 months is ok.

But it's not just pears that aren't good for babies to eat early, its any food that's not breast milk or formula. There's no evidence that pears are any worse for babies to eat than anything else.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#9 of 30 Old 09-13-2013, 05:00 AM
 
erigeron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

 

I also wonder if:

-it makes a difference if the formaldehyde is synthetic or naturally occurring

Formaldehyde is a very simple chemical formula. It is exactly the same formula no matter what source it is from. So why would it matter?


WOHM to a girl jog.gif (6-11) and a new baby boy stork-boy.gif (2-14) and adjusting to the full-time life and husband being a SAHD. 
erigeron is offline  
#10 of 30 Old 09-21-2013, 11:40 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,246
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)

Thought this was a good representation of formaldehyde in vaccines and why we shouldn't worry about it. 

 

erigeron likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#11 of 30 Old 09-21-2013, 07:23 PM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

Thought this was a good representation of formaldehyde in vaccines and why we shouldn't worry about it. 

Again, just because something is in or is naturally found in something that goes into the body, doesn't mean it's safe to inject it.  If you can come up w/ a valid study (as in a true placebo, a true control group and the like), I'd be interested to hear about it.  Until then, you can yell, scream, post, flag stuff & whatever else you want to do until the cows come home.  You aren't convincing me to allow my children to be guinea pigs to one of many substances that has not be proven safe.

 

You are welcome to use yours as such.

 

Best wishes,

Sus

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#12 of 30 Old 09-23-2013, 09:29 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,246
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mama24-7 View Post
 

Again, just because something is in or is naturally found in something that goes into the body, doesn't mean it's safe to inject it.  If you can come up w/ a valid study (as in a true placebo, a true control group and the like), I'd be interested to hear about it.  Until then, you can yell, scream, post, flag stuff & whatever else you want to do until the cows come home.  You aren't convincing me to allow my children to be guinea pigs to one of many substances that has not be proven safe.

 

You are welcome to use yours as such.

 

Best wishes,

Sus

 

But that reasoning would only makes sense if ingesting formaldehyde couldn't also be poisonous.   

 
Here are the effects of ingesting large amounts of formaldehyde: " Ingestion can lead to immediate deleterious effects on almost all systems of the body including gastrointestinal tract, central nervous system, cardiovascular system and hepato-renal system, causing gastrointestinal hemorrhage, cardiovascular collapse, unconsciousness or convulsions, severe metabolic acidosis and acute respiratory distress syndrome. No specific antidote is available. " 
 
So what gives? Why only make a distinction for injection? Since formaldehyde can be extremely poisonous if ingested why do you still feed your child foods that have formaldehyde in it?  Here's a list of some foods that contain formaldehyde :
 
I. Fruits & Vegetables
Food type Level (mg/kg)
Apple 6.3 – 22.3 
Apricot 9.5 
Banana 16.3 
Beetroot 35 
Bulb vegetables (e.g. onion) 11.0 
Cabbage 5.3 
Carrot 6.7 – 10 
Cauliflower 26.9 
Cucumber 2.3 – 3.7 
Grape 22.4 
Green Onion 13.3 – 26.3 
Kohlrabi 31 
Pear 38.7 – 60 
Plum 11.2 
Potato 19.5 
Spinach 3.3 – 7.3 
Tomato 5.7 – 13.3 
Water-melon 9.2 
White Radish 3.7 – 4.4 
Shiitake mushroom (dried) 100 – 406 
Shiitake mushroom (raw) 6 – 54.4 
 
Do you feed your child any of these foods? If you do, can you please show me the double blind placebo controlled study you consulted that shows that cucumbers, grapes, tomatoes, carrots, mushrooms, pears, and plums are safe? That the level of formaldehyde in these foods is a safe amount that doesn't cause any harm?  Preferably one that also includes a follow up of at least 20 years to prove that eating these foods doesn't cause cancer down the line. 
prosciencemum likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#13 of 30 Old 09-23-2013, 11:37 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,034
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Tea-you may want to do some more reading - 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

 
So what gives? 
 

 

actually a lots gives! to MANY

 

 

http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1379311/shocking-revelation-about-formaldehyde-in-pears-its-120-times-more-than-in-a-vaccine

 

This seems concerning:

 

 

Quote:
Genetic and related effects: Formaldehyde is a direct-acting genotoxic compound that affects multiple gene expression pathways, including those involved in DNA synthesis and repair and regulation of cell proliferation. … In vitro studies with mammalian and human cells were positive for DNA adducts, DNA-protein crosslinks, DNA-DNA crosslinks, unscheduled DNA synthesis, single-strand breaks, mutations, and cytogenetic effects (chromosomal aberrations, sister chromatid exchange, and micronucleus induction).

DNA Adducts:  a DNA adduct is a piece of DNA covalently bonded to a (cancer-causing) chemical. This process could be the start of a cancerous cell, or carcinogenesis

 

Bottom line for me - whats used in vaccines is formalin. Its just an aqueous solution of formaldehyde. 

 

In view of its widespread use, toxicity and volatility, exposure to formaldehyde is a significant consideration for human health.[4]In 2011, the US National Toxicology Program described formaldehyde as "known to be a human carcinogen".[5][6][7]

 

Let me break it down. You all can go on bickering about pears vs formalin and other synthetic forms of formaldehyde but here's the deal IMO based on my reading and research -THE SHIT IS TOXIC. So for all you "the poison is in the dose" folks - go ahead and feel good about injecting tiny amounts into your child - I will avoid all forms of this chemical to the best of my ability.

 

:yeah liked it before and I still DO!

 
 
Mirzam and 3lilchunklins like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#14 of 30 Old 09-23-2013, 12:03 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,246
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post
 

 

The body does not distinguish between the formaldehyde in vaccines vs the one that naturally occurs in the body.  

 
"When the body breaks down formaldehyde it does not distinguish between formaldehyde from vaccines and that which is naturally produced or environmental.
 
Using modeling, the FDA scientists assessed the concentrations of formaldehyde in the blood and total body water of a hypothetical 2-month-old infant following injection of formaldehyde containing vaccines into the muscle at a single medical visit.
 
Based on a maximal level of 200 micrograms of formaldehyde exposure from vaccination, the FDA model showed that the majority of the formaldehyde is essentially completely removed from the injection site within 30 minutes. The majority of the formaldehyde is broken down (metabolized) in the muscle and any remaining formaldehyde enters the bloodstream and body water. The model showed that at its highest concentration this remaining formaldehyde is less than 1% of the existing, naturally occurring level of formaldehyde in the body. The FDA scientists note that the natural level of formaldehyde in the body is more than 100 times higher than that found in vaccines. Moreover, there are no known adverse health affects from this naturally occurring formaldehyde. They concluded that the temporary presence of a very small amount of additional formaldehyde contributed by vaccination would pose no safety concerns. 
 
This study is part of a rigorous and ongoing evaluation of the safety of biological products for which FDA has oversight." 
 
 
But I guess you know more about it that virtually every other scientist in the world right? 
 
This study was done in April of 2013 so yes, scientists are continually researching and evaluation the safety of vaccine ingredients. 
 
But my question still stands.  If ingesting formaldehyde can also be poisonous and deadly where are the studies showing the safety of the foods I previously listed? That babies and children routinely ingest? Double blind placebo controlled studies, please. 
 
prosciencemum likes this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#15 of 30 Old 09-23-2013, 02:35 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,034
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

The body does not distinguish between the formaldehyde in vaccines vs the one that naturally occurs in the body.  

 
"When the body breaks down formaldehyde it does not distinguish between formaldehyde from vaccines and that which is naturally produced or environmental.
 
Using modeling, the FDA scientists assessed the concentrations of formaldehyde in the blood and total body water of a hypothetical 2-month-old infant following injection of formaldehyde containing vaccines into the muscle at a single medical visit.
 
Based on a maximal level of 200 micrograms of formaldehyde exposure from vaccination, the FDA model showed that the majority of the formaldehyde is essentially completely removed from the injection site within 30 minutes. The majority of the formaldehyde is broken down (metabolized) in the muscle and any remaining formaldehyde enters the bloodstream and body water. The model showed that at its highest concentration this remaining formaldehyde is less than 1% of the existing, naturally occurring level of formaldehyde in the body. The FDA scientists note that the natural level of formaldehyde in the body is more than 100 times higher than that found in vaccines. Moreover, there are no known adverse health affects from this naturally occurring formaldehyde. They concluded that the temporary presence of a very small amount of additional formaldehyde contributed by vaccination would pose no safety concerns. 
 
This study is part of a rigorous and ongoing evaluation of the safety of biological products for which FDA has oversight." 
 
 
But I guess you know more about it that virtually every other scientist in the world right? 
 
This study was done in April of 2013 so yes, scientists are continually researching and evaluation the safety of vaccine ingredients. 
 
But my question still stands.  If ingesting formaldehyde can also be poisonous and deadly where are the studies showing the safety of the foods I previously listed? That babies and children routinely ingest? Double blind placebo controlled studies, please. 
 

what are you trying to say here? :eyesroll

 

I can not understand most of your posts- please learn to quote! your posts do not reflect what ever you are trying to say when you don't really quote and just keep coping and pasting - very confusing

:dizzythings are all over the place and it's hard to tell what you are referring to

 

 

 
regardless, apparently you "understand" something that many of us don't buy into, nor does the state of Minnesota-I'm going with the Minnesota school of thought! :wink toxic! 
 
 
teacozy just some FYI, facebook pages promoting a set agenda (and with the help of those who make BIG $$ off of their vaccines-YES, maybe you should really check who is behind the site you are pasting from!) may not be the best source of accurate, non-bias information, just repeating it doesn't make it true-good to keep that in mind when you look at the sources you are posting from

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#16 of 30 Old 09-23-2013, 03:13 PM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)

I was trying to google something related to formaldehyde and came across this thread.  Some of you may enjoy it.  I am not convinced the amount of formaldehyde found in vaccines is dangerous - but I am not convinced it isn't either.  Aluminum is a very different story :wink​ 

 

http://www.mothering.com/community/t/837927/cdc-says-no-safe-levels-of-formaldehyde

 

I don't find the argument of xyz is naturally occurring in the body particularly convincing.  Maybe that is the level something is supposed to be at - and we should not increase it?   Vaccines are hardly the only item that children encounter that have ingredients in them that could impact their health.  To me it makes sense to remove toxic ingredients from vaccines (green them if you will) to reduce the over-all toxic burden on children, which many people agree is too high.   


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  
#17 of 30 Old 09-23-2013, 05:01 PM
 
sassyfirechick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 
I don't find the argument of xyz is naturally occurring in the body particularly convincing.  Maybe that is the level something is supposed to be at - and we should not increase it?   Vaccines are hardly the only item that children encounter that have ingredients in them that could impact their health.  To me it makes sense to remove toxic ingredients from vaccines (green them if you will) to reduce the over-all toxic burden on children, which many people agree is too high.  

:yeah   Naturally occurring is far different than something synthetic being injected into the body.  That's like the corn industry with their commercials promoting high fructose corn sugar as being perfectly healthy and processed just like other sugars in the body...definitely not.

 

This article is about aspartame but a lot of it talks about the conversion of methyl alcohol to formaldehyde and the damages it does. Also talks about the difference between naturally occurring and synthetic forms are metabolized differently in the body.  http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/11/11/aspartame-dangers.aspx

 

"First, methyl alcohol, while present in significant quantities in plants and vegetables is typically safely bound to pectin and since we do not have any enzymes capable of breaking that bond, once the methanol in fresh vegetables or fruits is eaten, it is safely eliminated in the stool."

 

"Remember when you consume methanol in soda, it easily breaks off from the phenylalanine in aspartame in your duodenum, and this is a major difference between consuming methanol in the form of aspartame versus getting it from fresh fruits and vegetables. Contrary to the bond between pectin and methanol, which is very strong, the bond holding the methanol in aspartame is extremely weak."

 

I think I'll wait til I'm dead to be preserved...and for that matter I could just get cremated and avoid it altogether!

sassyfirechick is offline  
#18 of 30 Old 09-24-2013, 02:29 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,246
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)

"Naturally occurring is far different than something synthetic being injected into the body." 

 

Again, the body cannot differentiate between the formaldehyde in vaccines vs the one that occurs naturally in the body. You can say it's different if you want, but you're wrong. 

 

 

 

This isn't a matter of opinion It's a fact. You can open up any chemistry book and look for yourself. 

 

Honestly there is no point in debating if you cannot agree to or concede a scientific fact.  

 

The fact that no one has answered my question about fruits and vegetables and formaldehyde is not lost on me. 

 

"regardless, apparently you "understand" something that many of us don't buy into, nor does the state of Minnesota-I'm going with the Minnesota school of thought! :wink toxic! " 

 

I would love to see where Minnesota policy says vaccines are dangerous, or says that the amount of formaldehyde in vaccines is dangerous.  


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#19 of 30 Old 09-24-2013, 03:02 PM
 
erigeron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Okay, maybe some formaldehyde in fruit is not biologically active anyway. Is all the formaldehyde in fruit present in the form of methanol bound to pectin? 

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10526968


WOHM to a girl jog.gif (6-11) and a new baby boy stork-boy.gif (2-14) and adjusting to the full-time life and husband being a SAHD. 
erigeron is offline  
#20 of 30 Old 09-24-2013, 06:36 PM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,838
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

The fact that no one has answered my question about fruits and vegetables and formaldehyde is not lost on me. 

 

 

You know what?  If formaldehyde is naturally occurring in food, it is not removable.  You can remove it from vaccines.  

applejuice and sassyfirechick 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  
#21 of 30 Old 09-24-2013, 08:28 PM
 
erigeron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

You know what?  If formaldehyde is naturally occurring in food, it is not removable.  You can remove it from vaccines.  

 

But if it's not DANGEROUS in vaccines, why would you need to? And if formaldehyde naturally occurs in the body at much higher levels, as well as in other foods that we eat, is the formaldehyde in vaccines somehow dangerous, while that in the body and in food is not? If so, how so? That's the question. Just saying "well, it could be removed" skirts the question. 


WOHM to a girl jog.gif (6-11) and a new baby boy stork-boy.gif (2-14) and adjusting to the full-time life and husband being a SAHD. 
erigeron is offline  
#22 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 07:55 AM
 
sassyfirechick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)

Does anyone pro-vax acknowledge that the body is designed with certain safeguards in mind in terms of how we naturally come into contact with pathogens, bacteria, and environmental contaminants", ie mucous membranes, skin, respirator tracts?  And that an injection directly into the blood stream bypasses those safeguards potentially allowing the body to perceive them as different than they'd otherwise be perceived?  For example, many food allergens can be caused by a damaged intestinal tract in which large holes in the membrane allow for larger proteins to enter the blood stream in which case the body perceives these as intruders and mounts an attack, aka an allergic response.  So while naturally occurring formaldehyde may be present in things we eat, it just may be that the intestinal tract deals with it differently than when directly injected into the blood.  Therefore it very well could be dangerous in vaccines yet perfectly harmless naturally occurring in the body and other foods.  When weighing the risks that occur with exposure to formaldehyde it seems logical that less is better.

3lilchunklins likes this.
sassyfirechick is offline  
#23 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 09:05 AM
 
erigeron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Vaccines aren't injected directly into the blood. They're injected into the tissues, and then diffuse, ultimately reaching the blood. If I could eliminate one phrase from the non-vax vocabulary, it might very well be this one. It drives me CRAZY. Anyway. 

 

I don't think anybody on either side has ever denied that injections bypass the body's defense systems. Of course injections bypass the body's defense systems. Of course products that are ingested undergo a certain amount of processing in the digestive system. Some medications are given by mouth and some by other routes because of these factors. Some drugs NEED to be given by mouth because they won't get to the site of action otherwise, like nystatin or vancomycin given orally to treat a GI infection--an IV version won't work because it won't get into the gut. Some drugs NEED to be given by injection because they'll be broken down in the stomach or intestinal tract and have no effect, like insulin and other protein-based drugs and various antibodies. There are much stricter quality and sterility controls for injectible drugs than oral drugs because of these factors. 

 

But one thing that does not change, regardless of administration route, is the chemical nature of a specific compound. Formaldehyde is formaldehyde is formaldehyde. It always has the same chemical composition. All formaldehyde molecules are identical; if they weren't, they wouldn't be formaldehyde, but something else. Supposing some of the formaldehyde in food is broken down in the gut and never reaches the bloodstream. So what? That's ultimately irrelevant. We want to look at the amount of formaldehyde present in the vaccine and how it compares to the amount that is already present in the bloodstream. And as discussed, the amount of formaldehyde introduced by the vaccine is dwarfed by the amount produced by the body itself. I'm going to assume the amount of formaldehyde that reaches the bloodstream from a pear is also negligible compared to the amount of formaldehyde already present in the bloodstream.

 

I'm not worried about pears or vaccines, but it seems inconsistent to me for you to be so worried about a vaccine but not about a pear when you aren't even sure how much formaldehyde gets into the bloodstream from a pear. You're willing to give the pear the benefit of the doubt that it's somehow processed differently in the stomach or intestines, even though you don't know the details, but you're unwilling to consider the formaldehyde burden from the vaccine in the context of the total body presence of formaldehyde. 

crayfishgirl likes this.

WOHM to a girl jog.gif (6-11) and a new baby boy stork-boy.gif (2-14) and adjusting to the full-time life and husband being a SAHD. 
erigeron is offline  
#24 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 09:11 AM
 
sassyfirechick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
I'm willing to trust what's present in nature over what has been produced in a lab, with minimal testing by an incredibly corrupt and biased system.
mama24-7 and 3lilchunklins like this.
sassyfirechick is offline  
#25 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 09:23 AM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
But that reasoning would only makes sense if ingesting formaldehyde couldn't also be poisonous.   
 
Here are the effects of ingesting large amounts of formaldehyde: " Ingestion can lead to immediate deleterious effects on almost all systems of the body including gastrointestinal tract, central nervous system, cardiovascular system and hepato-renal system, causing gastrointestinal hemorrhage, cardiovascular collapse, unconsciousness or convulsions, severe metabolic acidosis and acute respiratory distress syndrome. No specific antidote is available. " 
 
So what gives? Why only make a distinction for injection? Since formaldehyde can be extremely poisonous if ingested why do you still feed your child foods that have formaldehyde in it?  Here's a list of some foods that contain formaldehyde :
 
I. Fruits & Vegetables
Food type Level (mg/kg)
Apple 6.3 – 22.3 
Apricot 9.5 
Banana 16.3 
Beetroot 35 
Bulb vegetables (e.g. onion) 11.0 
Cabbage 5.3 
Carrot 6.7 – 10 
Cauliflower 26.9 
Cucumber 2.3 – 3.7 
Grape 22.4 
Green Onion 13.3 – 26.3 
Kohlrabi 31 
Pear 38.7 – 60 
Plum 11.2 
Potato 19.5 
Spinach 3.3 – 7.3 
Tomato 5.7 – 13.3 
Water-melon 9.2 
White Radish 3.7 – 4.4 
Shiitake mushroom (dried) 100 – 406 
Shiitake mushroom (raw) 6 – 54.4 
 
Do you feed your child any of these foods? If you do, can you please show me the double blind placebo controlled study you consulted that shows that cucumbers, grapes, tomatoes, carrots, mushrooms, pears, and plums are safe? That the level of formaldehyde in these foods is a safe amount that doesn't cause any harm?  Preferably one that also includes a follow up of at least 20 years to prove that eating these foods doesn't cause cancer down the line. 

 

I was away & this gave me a laugh!  Thanks.

 

On some of what you said, I don't agree w/ you on what you've said in your first "but."  I imagine there are lots of things that could be considered poisoness in large quantities but are fine for your average person if taken in the amounts found naturally in things that humans eat.  

 

What gives is there is a difference, one you either do not understand or fail to acknowledge, when you ingest a substance vs. when you inject a substance.  I'm not making a distinction between injection & ingestion only; you are assuming I'm making that one.  There is a difference between ingesting, inhaling, injecting & absorbing (those are all I can think of right now).  

 

And, for the record, my youngest who has lots of food issues as well as other issues (and I believe he's likely be dead by this point if he were to have received his share of the vaccinations that are recommended/mandated) and eats only one of the foods on your list.  Maybe the formaldehyde in beets is his problem.  :lol  That is the first time I've ever laughed about his issues!  Thanks for that.

 

I do not need studies to prove to me that eating things that are foods are safe.  Injecting things that humans have made up, hell yes!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

The body does not distinguish between the formaldehyde in vaccines vs the one that naturally occurs in the body.  

 
"When the body breaks down formaldehyde it does not distinguish between formaldehyde from vaccines and that which is naturally produced or environmental.
 
Using modeling, the FDA scientists assessed the concentrations of formaldehyde in the blood and total body water of a hypothetical 2-month-old infant following injection of formaldehyde containing vaccines into the muscle at a single medical visit.
 
Based on a maximal level of 200 micrograms of formaldehyde exposure from vaccination, the FDA model showed that the majority of the formaldehyde is essentially completely removed from the injection site within 30 minutes. The majority of the formaldehyde is broken down (metabolized) in the muscle and any remaining formaldehyde enters the bloodstream and body water. The model showed that at its highest concentration this remaining formaldehyde is less than 1% of the existing, naturally occurring level of formaldehyde in the body. The FDA scientists note that the natural level of formaldehyde in the body is more than 100 times higher than that found in vaccines. Moreover, there are no known adverse health affects from this naturally occurring formaldehyde. They concluded that the temporary presence of a very small amount of additional formaldehyde contributed by vaccination would pose no safety concerns. 
 
This study is part of a rigorous and ongoing evaluation of the safety of biological products for which FDA has oversight." 
 
 
But I guess you know more about it that virtually every other scientist in the world right? 
 
This study was done in April of 2013 so yes, scientists are continually researching and evaluation the safety of vaccine ingredients. 
 
But my question still stands.  If ingesting formaldehyde can also be poisonous and deadly where are the studies showing the safety of the foods I previously listed? That babies and children routinely ingest? Double blind placebo controlled studies, please. 
 

 

So, you are saying that the body does not distinguish between the way a substance enters the body? What proof do you have of that?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

"Naturally occurring is far different than something synthetic being injected into the body." 

 

Again, the body cannot differentiate between the formaldehyde in vaccines vs the one that occurs naturally in the body. You can say it's different if you want, but you're wrong. 

 

 

 

This isn't a matter of opinion It's a fact. You can open up any chemistry book and look for yourself. 

 

Honestly there is no point in debating if you cannot agree to or concede a scientific fact.  

 

The fact that no one has answered my question about fruits and vegetables and formaldehyde is not lost on me. 

 

"regardless, apparently you "understand" something that many of us don't buy into, nor does the state of Minnesota-I'm going with the Minnesota school of thought! :wink toxic! " 

 

I would love to see where Minnesota policy says vaccines are dangerous, or says that the amount of formaldehyde in vaccines is dangerous.  

 

Again, like my above reply: You are saying that the body makes no distinction between how it enters the body & how it is dealt w/?  What proof do you have of that?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by erigeron View Post
 

 

But if it's not DANGEROUS in vaccines, why would you need to? And if formaldehyde naturally occurs in the body at much higher levels, as well as in other foods that we eat, is the formaldehyde in vaccines somehow dangerous, while that in the body and in food is not? If so, how so? That's the question. Just saying "well, it could be removed" skirts the question. 

 

If ingredients in vaccinations aren't studied separately, how does anyone know?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post
Does anyone pro-vax acknowledge that the body is designed with certain safeguards in mind in terms of how we naturally come into contact with pathogens, bacteria, and environmental contaminants", ie mucous membranes, skin, respirator tracts?  And that an injection directly into the blood stream bypasses those safeguards potentially allowing the body to perceive them as different than they'd otherwise be perceived?  For example, many food allergens can be caused by a damaged intestinal tract in which large holes in the membrane allow for larger proteins to enter the blood stream in which case the body perceives these as intruders and mounts an attack, aka an allergic response.  So while naturally occurring formaldehyde may be present in things we eat, it just may be that the intestinal tract deals with it differently than when directly injected into the blood.  Therefore it very well could be dangerous in vaccines yet perfectly harmless naturally occurring in the body and other foods.  When weighing the risks that occur with exposure to formaldehyde it seems logical that less is better.

I agree w/ all this 99%.  The only thing I'd say differently is that I believe vaccinations are put into muscle.  Again, though, I'd imagine the body deals differently w/ injections into muscle vs. the blood stream directly, otherwise it'd be totally haphazard where they inject stuff!

 

Sus


Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#26 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 10:21 AM
 
erigeron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyfirechick View Post

I'm willing to trust what's present in nature over what has been produced in a lab, with minimal testing by an incredibly corrupt and biased system.

 

Taking a vaccine or other medication as a whole, as opposed to discussing one single ingredient--I can at least philosophically understand where you're coming from with this position, though I don't agree with it. But this thread is supposed to be about formaldehyde and I don't want to start a "nature is a harsh mistress" discussion. 

 

You asked if anyone pro-vax at least acknowledged the difference in different routes of administration. I was happy to confirm my acknowledgment and awareness of this for you.

 

Now is there any chance a non-vaxer on this thread can do something similar for me? Are there any non-vaxers who acknowledge that formaldehyde, in its pure form, unbound to anything else, is always the same chemical formula and has the same exact properties, no matter what source it is derived from? That "formaldehyde" means this one specific chemical compound and (barring the presence of carbon-14 or something) each formaldehyde molecule is chemically identical to each other one? 

 

Because I'm starting to feel like I'm beating my head against a wall here.

teacozy likes this.

WOHM to a girl jog.gif (6-11) and a new baby boy stork-boy.gif (2-14) and adjusting to the full-time life and husband being a SAHD. 
erigeron is offline  
#27 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 10:38 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,246
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mama24-7 View Post
 

 

I was away & this gave me a laugh!  Thanks.

 

On some of what you said, I don't agree w/ you on what you've said in your first "but."  I imagine there are lots of things that could be considered poisoness in large quantities but are fine for your average person if taken in the amounts found naturally in things that humans eat.  

 

What gives is there is a difference, one you either do not understand or fail to acknowledge, when you ingest a substance vs. when you inject a substance.  I'm not making a distinction between injection & ingestion only; you are assuming I'm making that one.  There is a difference between ingesting, inhaling, injecting & absorbing (those are all I can think of right now).  

 

And, for the record, my youngest who has lots of food issues as well as other issues (and I believe he's likely be dead by this point if he were to have received his share of the vaccinations that are recommended/mandated) and eats only one of the foods on your list.  Maybe the formaldehyde in beets is his problem.  :lol  That is the first time I've ever laughed about his issues!  Thanks for that.

 

I do not need studies to prove to me that eating things that are foods are safe.  Injecting things that humans have made up, hell yes!

 

 

 

So, you are saying that the body does not distinguish between the way a substance enters the body? What proof do you have of that?

 

 

Again, like my above reply: You are saying that the body makes no distinction between how it enters the body & how it is dealt w/?  What proof do you have of that?

 

 

If ingredients in vaccinations aren't studied separately, how does anyone know?

 

I agree w/ all this 99%.  The only thing I'd say differently is that I believe vaccinations are put into muscle.  Again, though, I'd imagine the body deals differently w/ injections into muscle vs. the blood stream directly, otherwise it'd be totally haphazard where they inject stuff!

 

Sus

 

"What gives is there is a difference, one you either do not understand or fail to acknowledge, when you ingest a substance vs. when you inject a substance." 

 

What you don't seem to understand is that chemicals that are eaten (mercury from tuna for example) DOES end up in your blood stream.  Once it is in your bloodstream the body doesn't care how it got there. They are treated the same way.  Yes a smaller portion from ingested food gets into the blood stream vs injected, BUT the amount you eat is so many times higher overtime that the amount in vaccines is minuscule by comparison. 

 

"Recent human biological monitoring by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1999 and 2000 (PDF) (3 pp., 42 KB, About PDF) shows that most people have blood mercury levels below a level (5.8 µg/L of whole blood) associated with possible health effects. Consumption of fish with higher methylmercury levels can lead to elevated levels of mercury in the bloodstream of unborn babies and young children and may harm their developing nervous system. "

http://www.epa.gov/hg/exposure.htm

 

 

As for how it is absorbed when injected :

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12184363

"The in vitro dissolution and in vivo absorption studies indicate that aluminum-containing adjuvants which are administered intramuscularly are dissolved by alpha-hydroxycarboxylic acids in interstitial fluid, absorbed into the blood, distributed to tissues, and eliminated in the urine."

 

The muscles dissolve the adjuvants before going into the blood stream. It then gets eliminated by the kidneys through urine. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#28 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 10:54 AM
 
sassyfirechick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)

I will acknowledge that formaldehyde is formaldehyde - BUT if you read my link earlier there is a difference in what it bonds to based on where it is derived from so on some level there is a distinct difference chemically that someone is either overlooking or refusing to acknowledge in the medical world.

BeckyBird likes this.
sassyfirechick is offline  
#29 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 01:43 PM
 
erigeron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

No, your link earlier says that formaldehyde's precursor, methanol, when present in fruit is bound to a different factor than that present in aspartame. The methanol itself is the same. The exact same element or compound can have different binding partners based on various conditions. It's the conditions that lead to the difference in the co-factor, not some characteristic of the formaldehyde itself. Similarly, glucose by itself is glucose, but when it's bound to a molecule of fructose the compound of the two is sucrose. When it's bound to galactose, the compound is lactose. And so on. But the glucose itself has the same chemical structure in each instance.

 

Also, the Mercola piece doesn't account for any other sources of formaldehyde in food that are bound to still other factors. 


WOHM to a girl jog.gif (6-11) and a new baby boy stork-boy.gif (2-14) and adjusting to the full-time life and husband being a SAHD. 
erigeron is offline  
#30 of 30 Old 09-25-2013, 06:11 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,092
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post


The muscles dissolve the adjuvants before going into the blood stream. It then gets eliminated by the kidneys through urine. 

Not if vitamin D deficiency or glutathione depletion are part of the picture. There is also speculation that pre-existing autoimmune issues and intestinal damage can also interfere with heavy metal elimination. Of course, vaccines themselves can cause autoimmune issues and intestinal damage.

And when those heavy metals are not eliminated, they end up crossing the blood-brain barrier.
Mirzam, applejuice and BeckyBird like this.
Taximom5 is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
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