Respectful Insolence

I’m almost beginning to feel sorry for the mercury militia.

Think about it. They’ve been claiming for the past several years that the mercury in the thimerosal used as a preservative in childhood vaccines is a cause of autism. If you believe Generation Rescue, A-CHAMP, SAFEMINDS, and various other activist groups, vaccines are the root of all neurodevelopmental evil, culminating in what to them seems to be the most evil of evil condition, autism. Yet, in study after study in the new millennium, no correlation has been found to implicated their favorite bête noire thimerosal, which serves as a surrogate for their general dislike of vaccines in general.

It comes as no surprise, then, that A-CHAMP would want to launch a pre-emptive strike against a large study of thimerosal-containing vaccines that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine today. Blazing out of their website is the headline New CDC Study Falsely Claims Thimerosal is Safe

On September 27, 2007 the New England Journal of Medicine will publish a study entitled, “Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years.” For more than two years we at A-CHAMP have been hearing rumors of a new study that “exonerates” thimerosal, despite the fact that the study results were supposed to be kept strictly confidential.

Now the rumors have been turned into hype – another government funded study that tries to spin data and clear thimerosal of any suspicion of causing neurodevelopmental disorders. The study authors claim in their “Conclusions” that “[o]ur study does not support a causal association between early exposure to mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines and immune globulins and neuropsychological functioning at the age of 7 to 10 years.”

The statement is plainly false. The study’s conclusions do not reflect the study’s data or the limitations of the study,

You’d think that at least A-CHAMP would correct that hanging comma at the end of the sentence there.

Sarcasm aside, the study’s conclusions do reflect the study’s data, quite well, as we will see, and A=CHAMP’s complaints boil down to the usual crank technique of cherry picking the evidence, combined perhaps with sour grapes. Let’s lay the abstract out for all to see before we look at A-CHAMP’s individual points:

Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years
William W. Thompson, Ph.D., Cristofer Price, Sc.M., Barbara Goodson, Ph.D., David K. Shay, M.D., M.P.H., Patti Benson, M.P.H., Virginia L. Hinrichsen, M.S., M.P.H., Edwin Lewis, M.P.H., Eileen Eriksen, M.P.H., Paula Ray, M.P.H., S. Michael Marcy, M.D., John Dunn, M.D., M.P.H., Lisa A. Jackson, M.D., M.P.H., Tracy A. Lieu, M.D., M.P.H., Steve Black, M.D., Gerrie Stewart, M.A., Eric S. Weintraub, M.P.H., Robert L. Davis, M.D., M.P.H., Frank DeStefano, M.D., M.P.H., for the Vaccine Safety Datalink Team

Background It has been hypothesized that early exposure to thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative used in vaccines and immune globulin preparations, is associated with neuropsychological deficits in children.

Methods We enrolled 1047 children between the ages of 7 and 10 years and administered standardized tests assessing 42 neuropsychological outcomes. (We did not assess autism-spectrum disorders.) Exposure to mercury from thimerosal was determined from computerized immunization records, medical records, personal immunization records, and parent interviews. Information on potential confounding factors was obtained from the interviews and medical charts. We assessed the association between current neuropsychological performance and exposure to mercury during the prenatal period, the neonatal period (birth to 28 days), and the first 7 months of life.

Results Among the 42 neuropsychological outcomes, we detected only a few significant associations with exposure to mercury from thimerosal. The detected associations were small and almost equally divided between positive and negative effects. Higher prenatal mercury exposure was associated with better performance on one measure of language and poorer performance on one measure of attention and executive functioning. Increasing levels of mercury exposure from birth to 7 months were associated with better performance on one measure of fine motor coordination and on one measure of attention and executive functioning. Increasing mercury exposure from birth to 28 days was associated with poorer performance on one measure of speech articulation and better performance on one measure of fine motor coordination.

Conclusions Our study does not support a causal association between early exposure to mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines and immune globulins and deficits in neuropsychological functioning at the age of 7 to 10 years.

It’s noted that a similar study looking at autism will be published next year. Of course, the fact that this study didn’t look at autism leaves the antivaxers a huge opening to say, “Well, yes, but you didn’t look at autism.” Never mind that there are now several studies that did look at autism and found no association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism. So what are the main complaints that A-CHAMP has about this study? Let’s take a look, starting with the first one:

The Study’s Claim of No Causality is Contrary to the Study’s Data. The study authors claim that the data disproves causality when in fact, several findings show a negative effect on neuropsychological functioning warranting more study. At least one such adverse association was also found to be associated with low dose thimerosal exposure in other studies. As with earlier studies hyped by vaccine promoters, the study is unable to prove or disprove causality. The blanket dismissal of the troubling neuropsychological outcomes in this study is disingenuous and misleading.

First off, the study didn’t claim that there was “no causality.” What it stated is exactly what you see in the Conclusions section: That the study does not support a causal relationship. There’s a difference there too subtle for the ideologues who wrote this press release to understand. It’s impossible ever to prove “no causality.” It is, however, possible to conclude from the data that the data does not support a causal relationship. Second, A-CHAMP is cherry picking associations here. It is true that there were some negative correlations found that achieved statistical significance. When running 42 tests, it would be shocking if there were not a few anomalous findings. What makes the study authors fairly confident that the findings are anomalous is that they were divided roughly equally in both directions, good and bad. Consequently, if A-CHAMP is going to insist that the correlation, for example, with increasing mercury exposure and poorer performance on the GFTA-2 measure of speech articulation test, then it must also accept the findings of a beneficial association between mercury and identification of letters and numbers on the WJ-III test, as there is no reason to reject it. Naturally, the mercury militia picks on the associations as being true that they want to be true and ignore the other associations, which, if true, would be arguments for including thimerosal in vaccines. It’s far more likely that all of them are just noise. Again, the reason that investigators can reasonably conclude that the associations found are most likely due to random chance is because of their random distribution between positive and negative.

Another complaint:

Children with autism were excluded from this study. The early media contacts we have received suggest that this study shows no association between thimerosal and autism. In fact, the study specifically did not look at children with autism as the sample size was too small and the testing is impossible to complete for the typical child with autism. The exclusion of children with autism from the study may have undermined the power of the study to draw any conclusions about thimerosal.

This is a really, really dumb statement. I’m sorry, but there’s no other way to put it. It just is. It’s like criticizing an apple for not being an orange. The explanation for this is right in the paper, “Since the CDC is conducting a separate case-control study of autism in relation to mercury exposure, a measure of autism was not included in the test battery.” Get it, idiots? A separate study is being done and the results will be reported in a separate paper! That renders this complaint utterly irrelevant. It’s nothing more than a red herring designed to fire up the faithful.

This complaint is not really stupid, but definitely overblown:

The Study’s Methodology has Serious Limitations Negating Any Conclusions Drawn. Major flaws that that causes a large underestimation of neurological adverse effects burden the study: 70% of the families recruited for the study failed to participate. This kind of bias in epidemiological studies is well known to distort even large studies of health effects…It is well established that people who choose to participate in this kind of study are probably very different than those who refuse to participate (the “healthy person” or “complier” effect); especially when the ones who refused to participate said they were too busy.

Simply put: if you have a kid with ADHD or mild ASD or other neurodevelopmental disorders, you are likely to be busier, more stressed, and less available than the mother of a healthy normal child. This phenomenon serves to amplify the effect of the “complier”, the ;healthy families,” – those who do cooperate with the study – confounding or confusing the study’s results. The cooperative parents included in the study were more likely to be those with relatively trouble-free kids

There’s no evidence that this sort of bias existed, and A-CHAMP conveniently omits other biases that might be result from such a selection bias. For example, it is also quite possible to argue that parents who think vaccines may have caused their child’s condition would be even more likely to want to participate in the study (self-selection bias), than parents whose children are normal or who don’t believe vaccines had anything to do with their child’s problems; they might have thought that it wasn’t worth their bother. It’s good of the antivaxers who have been championing the execrable telephone survey done by Generation Rescue to recognize that this sort of bias exists; too bad they only mention it when it suits their purposes (i.e., to trash a study whose results they don’t like) and ignore it when it doesn’t, for example when it calls into doubt the results of the Generation Rescue telephone poll.

In reality, the fact that only 30% of the families who were approached for the study agreed to participate is probably the most significant weakness of the study. The authors don’t try to hide it. Rather, they are right up front with it in the Discussion section, while at the same time pointing out that this is this possible bias was ameliorated by enrolling children on the basis of having received vaccinations without regard to the seeking of health care or having been given a neurodevelopmental diagnosis, as well as noting that many children weren’t enrolled because they couldn’t be located. Moreover, exposure information was obtained from many different sources. It also looked at prenatal exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccinations from vaccines that the mother might have had while pregnant.

Next complaint:

Vulnerable Children Were Excluded from the Study; Early Intervention Was Ignored. Children with a birth weight under 5 lbs. 8 oz. were excluded from the study further skewing the results, as these children are likely more vulnerable to thimerosal than larger babies. In addition, the fact that early intervention may have reduced deficits such as speech delay detected by neuropsychological testing of children aged 7-10 was not accounted for in the study results. There also was no analysis of combined prenatal and postnatal mercury exposures. Only 103 mothers who were exposed to mercury from prenatal immune globulins participated in the study, far too small a group for researchers to draw conclusions regarding the safety of thimerosal in these products.

This is a grab-bag of the specious and semireasonable. The reason for excluding low birthweight children was obvious: Such children are more likely to have neurodevelopmental problems completely independent from any external cause, such as thimerosal. Including preemies and lower birth weight children would only contribute to the background noise and make finding true associations more difficult. A-CHAMP should be glad that the investigators did that, given that it was almost certainly done to make the study more likely to find an association between vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders. In addition, there is no evidence that low birth weight children are “more vulnerable to thimerosal.” Of course, once again, A-CHAMP fails to point out that the authors themselves pointed out the shortcoming in regard to not being able to account for interventions such as speech therapy. As for the whining about not analyzing combined prenatal and postnatal mercury exposures, that’s just a red herring; the study did test an a priori assumption of interaction between pre- and postnatal mercury exposure.

The rest of the complaints are the standard ones: Conflict of interest, for example, because several of the study’s authors had received funding from pharmaceutical companies. These potential conflicts of interest are clearly stated in the study. A-CHAMP also brings up a totally specious complaint of the study supposedly not accounting for “efflux” disorder (i.e., children who are allegedly “poor excretors” of mercury). Fortunately, Prometheus has provided a good explanation of what a crock that whole myth is, so that I don’t have to.

Of course, there is another reason, besides this study failing to show what the mercury militia wants it to, that there is such hostility here:

The politicization of the thimerosal issue has led researchers to take unprecedented measures. Unlike previous studies, the current study included more than a dozen outside consultants, including at least one advocate for families of children with autism. “We have really tried to make the entire process–from experiment design to manuscript review–as transparent as possible,” says Thompson. But that effort may not have made a difference in the long run. Sallie Bernard, executive director of Safe Minds, a nonprofit parents’ organization that focuses on the role of mercury in neurodevelopment disorders, consulted on the study but still takes issue with its findings. “All the studies, including this one have certain limitations in their design and their methodology,” she says.

Sour grapes, anyone? Ms. Bernard was a consultant on this study and helped contribute to its design! She apparently didn’t like the results that it was producing and decided to drop out and start criticizing it–even jumping the gun on the 5 PM embargo yesterday to do so! Indeed, she is listed on the study in a way that I’ve never seen before: as a “dissenting member.”

How many studies by mercury militia enablers Mark and David Geier include even a note of dissent?

Although this study is not without flaws, it nonetheless does not support a correlation between thimerosal-containing vaccines and the neurodevelopmental problems studied. Even better, the New England Journal of Medicine included two editorials along with the story. One editorial discussed the explosion of vaccine litigation that the now discredited thimerosal “hypothesis” has unleashed, immune to the findings of science. The second editorial is by Paul Offit (the Antichrist to antivaxers) and makes an excellent point about the unintended consequences of taking precautionary measures on the basis of little or no evidence:

On July 9, 1999, after much wrangling, the CDC and AAP decided to exercise the precautionary principle. They asked pharmaceutical companies to remove thimerosal from vaccines as quickly as possible; in the interim, they asked doctors to delay the birth dose of hepatitis B vaccine in children who weren’t at risk for hepatitis. A press release issued by the AAP revealed the ambivalence among its members: “Parents should not worry about the safety of vaccines,” it read. “The current levels of thimerosal will not hurt children, but reducing those levels will make safe vaccines even safer. While our current immunization strategies are safe, we have an opportunity to increase the margin of safety.” Critics wondered how removing something that hadn’t been found to be unsafe could make vaccines safer. But many parents, frightened by a sudden change in policy, reasoned that thimerosal was targeted because it was harmful — and their faith in the vaccine infrastructure was shaken. Doctors were also confused by the recommendation.

I could see how that would confuse parents and doctors. Offit concludes:

Despite several years of reassuring studies, the thimerosal controversy continues to be emotionally charged. Physicians, scientists, government policy advisors, and child advocates who have publicly stated that vaccines don’t cause neurologic problems or autism have been harassed, threatened, and vilified, receiving hate mail and occasionally death threats. The CDC, in response to planned protests at its gates, recently beefed up security and instructed personnel about how to respond if physically attacked.

During the next few years, thimerosal will probably be removed from influenza vaccines, and the court cases will probably settle down. But the thimerosal controversy should stand as a cautionary tale of how not to communicate theoretical risks to the public; otherwise, the lesson inherent in the collateral damage caused by its precipitous removal will remain unlearned.

Exactly. With the best of intentions, trying to be as “safe” as possible, the AAP and CDC unleashed a tsunami of fear of vaccines and laid the groundwork for pseudoscientists like Mark and David Geier to stoke the fears of mercury further with badly designed studies. This was an example of framing science at its worst.

In the end, it is always frustrating to watch how such studies are spun by antivaccinationists. Epidemiology is like that, though. It’s virtually impossible to conduct a cohort study like this without permitting significant shortcomings in it. The reason is that, unlike a bench experiment, the investigators can never control all the variables. Trade-offs are inevitably made, and rarely are there adequate resources to assure sample sizes large enough to be bullet-proof or to be able to account for all potentially confounding variables. No one study is ever sufficient to rule out correlations between undesirable outcomes and various compounds. However, as the weight of several studies starts to bear down on the problem, the preponderance of evidence must at some point be accepted, because we do not have unlimited resources to keep doing studies to answer the same question over and over and over again and every repeated study uses resources that could be used to study other potential causes and treatments for autism. This study happens to be one large and convincing chunk of that evidence, but it is not the only one. Coming next year, when the CDC releases a similar trial about autism, will be another. As Dr. Offit said:

In a new study, Thompson and his colleagues are taking another look at thimerosal exposure and autism. But for many, the question has been resolved. “This study is the third one of its kind. When the autism one comes out, it will be the sixth of its kind. They’ve all shown the same thing–that there is no significant correlation,” says Offit. “Meanwhile, the thimerosal question has diverted attention and resources away from the search for more promising leads on what causes autism. How many more studies will it take?”

That’s the difference between science and crankery. If this study had shown a clear and convincing correlation between thimerosal in vaccines and neurdevelopmental disorders, I would have accepted the results and perhaps started to change my mind. On the other hand, for cranks, no number of studies is ever enough to dissuade them from their beliefs. If God Himself were to come down from on high and design the absolutely perfect study, which when carried out showed no correlation between thimerosal in vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders, the antivaccinationists would insist that it was flawed, that the investigators had conflicts of interest, and that it needs to be repeated until (although they would never admit this) it shows the results they want it to show.

In fact, expect just that. The CDC has pledged to make the raw data available to other researchers. I predict that, within a few months, a study by Mark and David Geier will use their trademark bad statistics and bad math to cook the numbers to make it look as though there are associations between thimerosal in vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders that the CDC “covered up.”

Just wait.

ADDENDUM: Some more commentary on this study:

From Left Brain/Right Brain:

No, everything was fine and dandy as long as she [Bernard] was enjoying being fawned over as a “representative of the autism community” and a fellow-scientist instead of the commercial marketer she actually is. Here’s a clue, Sallie: If you’re going to play scientist, you have to follow the rules of science, and that means you stand by your results. You don’t get to say “heads I win, tails you lose” by waiting to see the outcome before deciding whether the study was any good.

And you really don’t get to have CDC at your beck and call, spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to do a study to your specifications, then turn around and call them liars when you don’t like how it comes out.

And you, CDC? You’re not just a victim here. Every time you say “let’s do more research” or “we are examining this issue” in order to appease the mercury moms, you increase the chances that kids will go unvaccinated because you failed to give their parents confidence in the safety of vaccines. When you say a study is reassuring and then highlight what is virtually certain to have been a chance finding (a statistical association between higher thimerosal exposure and transient tics in boys) without making it abundantly clear that some false associations were inevitable given the study design, you defeat the purpose of doing the study.

From AutismVox:

Safe Minds, whose Executive Director, Sallie Bernard, was an external consultant and dissenting member of the study, put out a press release stating that the new study’s “draws a misleading conclusion.” But this statement is as “misleading” as the headlines cited above are about the study’s actual contents This only furthers the belief that–no matter how clearly it is stated and shown that there is no causal association between early exposure to thimerasol and later neuropsychological outcomes—a link between these has been firmly established in the public mind. And disputing that link will take more studies, more evidence, more efforts, and more self-scrutiny of why we believe what we believe.

From Autism Natural Variation:

The CDC study looked at 42 different outcomes, and determined multiple confidence intervals in each case, since different levels of exposure were tested. In total, I understand there were over 300 confidence intervals. Consequently, assuming the null hypothesis is correct, you should expect that an RR of 1.0 will be outside the 95% confidence interval in over 15 measures. What the study found was that in 12 measures there was an apparent protective factor, and in 8 measures there was an apparent risk factor. This is completely consistent with the null hypothesis. Therefore, the conclusion of the study, namely that the results of the same do not support a causal association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and neurological outcomes, is absolutely the correct conclusion.

From Arthur Allen on The Huffington Post:

Despite the wealth of data showing that vaccines do not cause autism, many parents continue to believe the theory. Jenny McCarthy, an ex-Playboy Bunny and TV personage, has been making the rounds of the media this week (Oprah, ABC, People magazine) to promote her book, in which she claims that her child was made autistic by vaccines but was “recovered” through alternative therapies.

A large CDC study comparing thimerosal exposure rates in autistic and non-autistic kids is due out around this time next year, as is an Italian study of the question. The data will probably duplicate the many previous studies that have shown no effect. The dogs may bark but the caravan moves on. Or is it the other way around

(The comments from die-hard antivaxers after Allen’s post are scary indeed.)

From Derek Lowe at In the Pipeline:

The director of SafeMinds, a group of true thimerosal believers if ever there was, actually was on the consulting board of this latest study. But she withdrew her name from the final document. The CDC is conducting a large thimerosal-and-autism study whose results should come out next year. Here’s a prediction for you: if that one fails to show a connection, and I have every expectation that it’ll fail to show one, SafeMinds will not accept the results. Anyone care to bet against that?

As a scientist, I’ve had to take a lot of good, compelling ideas of mine and toss them into the trash when the data failed to support them. Not everything works, and not everything that looks as if it makes sense really does. It’s getting to the point with the autism/thimerosal hypothesis- has, in fact, gotten to the point quite some time ago – that the data have failed to support it. If you disagree, and I know from my e-mail that some readers will, then ask yourself what data would suffice to make you abandon your belief? If you can’t think of any, you have moved beyond medicine and beyond science, and I’ll not follow you.

Commenting on David Kirby’s truly idiotic take on this study in The Huffington Post, Steve Novella at Neurologica:

What Kirby does is not just really dumb, it’s despicable. He cherry picks all the negative (meaning bad) neurological outcomes and pretends that the study shows a correlation (it doesn’t, when you look at ALL the data). He then tries to dismiss the positive (good) outcomes as absurd. He mockingly writes:

If they (the CDC) really mean that thimerosal increases IQ levels in males, then sign me up for a double-dose flu shot this year.

No, David, they don’t mean that. Not by any stretch of the imagination. It takes incompetent statistical analysis or the blindness of ideology to write something so ridiculous. What the CDC means is that the study does NOT show that thimerosal increases IQ, nor that it causes motor tics, or improve motor skills, or decrease language skills, or anything else. The study showed no correlations because it all averaged out as noise.

Steve, normally polite to a fault even with cranks, seems to be laying down a bit of the old Respectful Insolence™. I like it.

Comments

  1. #1 wfjag
    September 27, 2007

    Considering the number of children who have died or been disabled in recent years due to preventable diseases because their parents were frightened into not having them vaccinated because of bogus studies funded by plaintiffs’ lawyers who were trying to manufacture class action suits, “no,” I don’t “feel sorry for the mercury militia.”

    Dear Dr. Orac: A new “claim” circulating is that thimerosal in flu vaccines is dangerous. Since flu vaccines are weakened live virus produced annually for the expected type of flu virus, and so used in a few months to weeks, and since thirmerosal kills virsuses, this claim makes no sense. Do you have a site discussing thimerosal and flu vaccines? Thanks.

  2. #2 Ezekiel Buchheit
    September 27, 2007

    I’ll do you one worse. I live in Austin Tx (A wonderful town in a scary, scary state). Austin proudly boasts many claims to fame. We had Stevie Ray Vaughan, we’ve got more live music playing on any given day than your most ardent meth fiend could make it to, we have, in short a wonderful city.

    We also have Alex Jones. This guy is a conspiracy theorists, theorist. This guy makes Manson seem lucid (and I mean that in the most un-libelous way, Mr. Jones. Love your show. Don’t sue.) He has claimed not only that the mercury causes autism, but that it was never taken out of the vaccines. That all this stuff is a lie concocted by the New World Order as part of their plan to reduce the global population.

    And people believe this shit. I drive around, and every hundreth car has one of Alex Jones’s bumper stickers. (I actually support these stickers. It operates, for me, as a filtration system. If you have one of these stickers, I know not to engage you in conversation.)

    The problem with irrationality is that there is no force stronger. Not even reality. Irration can only be battled with irration. And I’ve yet to see a way of turning ration into somekind of irration virus, that destroys irration memes, leaving the mind susceptable to clear, cogent thought.

  3. #3 MartinM
    September 27, 2007

    It is true that there were some negative correlations found that achieved statistical significance.

    Among the 42 neuropsychological outcomes, we detected only a few significant associations with exposure to mercury from thimerosal.

    Meh. ‘Significant’ should not be used as short-hand for ‘significant at α=0.05′

    If you want a significance level of 0.05 overall, and you’re doing 42 separate tests, the appropriate significance level for each test should be substantially lower. If we go around describing results as ‘significant’ purely because we’re using ridiculously generous standards of significance, it’s no wonder people will jump on it, whether through ignorance or dishonesty.

  4. #4 aluminumfree
    September 27, 2007

    Mercury is not the only neurotoxin in vaccines. Actually Dr Offit state thimerosol will be removed from flu shots but this year it will be added back into some pediatric flu shots.

    My son developed autism overnight after getting 15 month vaccines. He stopped speaking and regressed in walking overnight. Turned out he actually had aluminum poisoning which cleared up very nicely a few months later once we knew what to treat. No thanks to my son’s doctors who only told me I imagined his problems…they changed mind when they saw test results for aluminum poisoning and began to finally help.

    Still there is no study or safety trial comparing long term effects of vaccines to non-reactive placebo. All drugs FDA approves require this but not vaccines. All aluminum adjuvanted vaccines are compared either to other aluminum vaccines or to placebo containing aluminum. Children have been harmed in these misleading and unethical trials (Gardasil safety trial…70 girls died during trial…some of deaths and injuries could be attributed to aluminum..blood clots, car accidents, suicides, rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, diabetes). All vaccines are required to undergo long term efficacy studies. None are required to undergo long term safety trials which could be done at same time. The EPA and OSHA regulate aluminum as neurotoxin and immune toxin. The FDA places NO restrictions whatsoever on use of aluminum in foods or drugs. The AAP states infant exposure to aluminum should be minimized wherever possible, yet vaccines containing it keep being added to list AAP recommends, and the AAP does not warn parents or influence food industry to take aluminum out of foods like chicken nuggets and frozen waffles, food dyes, baked goods that are staples in children’s diets.

    Several studies have linked aluminum in IV solutions given to preterm infants to measurable decreases in cognitive abilities for each day the infant received the formula. Oddly, these infants also developed intestinal problems much like those of autistic children. Even when corrected for differences in weight, vaccines given according to CDC guidelines at 2,4,6, and 12-18 months have several times this amount of aluminum known to cause brain damage injected into baby. Many case studies of a condition called macrophagic myofasciitis (MMF) link delay in walking skills directly to aluminum vaccines; MMF is also linked to low muscle tone and other neurological disorders associated with aluminum poisoning.

    Aluminum is known to cause loss of speech, swelling of brain, ADD/ADHD, learning disorder, seizures, tics, brittle bones, low muscle tone, developmental delay, eczema, asthma, food allergy, blood clots, irritability, violent behavior, linked to auto-immune disorders like type 1 diabetes, Gulf War Syndrome, fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, irritable bowel/celiac/Crohn’s disease, chronic fatigue syndrome. Why has it never been tested for safety either by injection or ingestion? These are very different methods of exposure…ingestion of aluminum is less dangerous since aluminum is very poorly absorbed across the intestinal barrier, though CDC uses data for ingestion of aluminum (and mercury) to demonstrate the safety of injecting it into babies and adults when this is very poor comparison. Data exists showing much greater dangers of injecting lower doses of aluminum than are in vaccines. Mountains of data in ATSDR’s toxicological profile for aluminum demonstrate its toxicity. When will vaccine safety trials be performed which don’t eliminate effects of aluminum by adding this potent neurotoxin to placebo or control group?

    cheers
    aluminum free

  5. #5 vlad
    September 27, 2007

    Here’s the question I ask all NWO conspiracy nuts. If this (pick you favorite) is all true and you know about it, why are you still breathing?
    If pharma had all this power they would simply cause accidents to happen to the leaders of these nut bag groups, uh concerned parents with no conflict of interest. If the feds are so completely comfortable with killing all those people at the WTC then why would they not simply wipe out the nuts, uh I mean those truly in the know.

  6. #6 aluminumfree
    September 27, 2007

    vlad, I don’t think the manufacturers who are on vaccine advisory and CDC board care about these people so long as they are still making money from vaccines. But if anything happens to Jenny McCarthy or Holly Peete after all of the talk shows they have done on this subject lately maybe we should be suspect. The cattle industry took Oprah to court for what she said about mad cow disease. No one is taking these people to court yet. Maybe they don’t have any evidence to counter their claims.

  7. #7 freealuminum
    September 27, 2007

    I hear aluminum makes up ~8% of the Earth’s crust. Isn’t there something we can do about that?

    I’m doing my part though. Got my foil headgear firmly in place.

  8. #8 MartinM
    September 27, 2007

    But if anything happens to Jenny McCarthy or Holly Peete after all of the talk shows they have done on this subject lately maybe we should be suspect.

    Especially if they’re in an aluminium-related car crash.

  9. #9 Justin Moretti
    September 27, 2007

    Aluminiumfree, you are a liar and a troll.

    Post some links to proof or burn in Hell for your filthy slander.

  10. #10 freealuminum
    September 27, 2007

    If I remember correctly, from the Playboy spread…erm…pictorial, Jenny has an Audi

  11. #11 HCN
    September 27, 2007

    Justin Moretti, I bet Mr. Al-free will say that his proof is all gone because of the evil “Aluminati”… which is actually controlled by the Illuminati to promote mind control.

    Of course they want you to block the radio controls to your brain by using aluminum foil… it is a tactic by the Aluminati to get folks more Al poisoned.

    Or whatever. I am just making it up as I go along, just like Mr. Al-free.

    Like when he says “vlad, I don’t think the manufacturers who are on vaccine advisory and CDC board care about these people so long as they are still making money from vaccines.”

    Yeah, sure… which is cheaper, having kids get a vaccine or having them get the actual disease with a good percentage of those ending up in the hospital? Here:
    http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/content/hackney/gazette/news/story.aspx?brand=HKYGOnline&category=news&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newshkyg&itemid=WeED31%20Aug%202007%2008%3A55%3A01%3A610 … it says 10 children have been admitted to hospital with pneumonia. That requires respirators, lots of medications and 24 hour nursing staff for about a week (I have had a kid in the hospital for seizures and later for croup, I’ve seen the bills). Wouldn’t it have been cheaper to PREVENT measles?

    Mr. Al-free, are these two boys in danger from the aluminum in their brand new wheelchairs?:
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1055533.ece

  12. #12 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    September 27, 2007

    My child also developed Autism directly after his vaccinations. What we later learned was 2H2O poisoning. After much testing and having to change doctors many times to find one sympathetic to us we were able to show that the level 2H2O in his body was the cause of things. Because the first set of doctors and the CDC refuse to test correctly for this or are shills for the 2H2O lobby this could be happening all over the country. They wouldn’t want to lose those fat paychecks they get from the 2H2O pushing companies. Because you can find 2H2O in many if not all vaccines and even many of the bases of IV administered drugs this is something we need to fight or risk submitting our next generation to the evils of autism.

    2H2Ofree

  13. #13 Uncle Dave
    September 27, 2007

    It appears that the scientific method is no stumbling block for those that are pre-disposed to the Theromosal connection.

    Even working in failure analysis and engineering forensics for the aerospace industry as I do, I have to make it a point to not let the engineers who hand me a failed system tell me to much about it before I begin an investigation. I do not like to be influenced by pre investigation hypothosis. This is where many supporters of the Thimerosal connection cannot seem to dismiss themselves.

    Did the The New England Journal of medicine publicly disclosed that it was a poor decision to remove Thimerosal from vaccines? First it raised suspicion among those predisposed to mercury poisoning, however, over time it helped show that autism rates have not decreased even after thermosal removal.
    Again, from my experience autism does not typically show up develomentally until the age of 2. Children whom have never been vaccinated develop autism symptoms around age 2.

    If I were to take the opinion that Thimerosal is a cause, would it be fair of me to then disregard pre-natal drug, alcohol interaction or family genetic history?

  14. #14 Brian
    September 27, 2007

    Because the first set of doctors and the CDC refuse to test correctly for this or are shills for the 2H2O lobby this could be happening all over the country.

    There’s a deuterium oxide lobby?!

  15. #15 A non-troll
    September 27, 2007

    Orac-

    I am a long time, every day, lurker of the site but I rarely comment. My wife and I are expecting our 2nd child and she is in that ‘worry phase’ right now. Part of the reason is that she worries so much, is her exposure to children with developmental disabilities (psych.). I am a young attorney (no darts please).

    Here is the issue, I am definately a pro-vaccine, as is she. But she has concerns about vaccinating so young; especially after our first child had a miserable couple of days after the MMR treatment.

    I am not a conspiracy nut, far from it. I am also not an anti-vaccine plaintiff’s attorney. However strange this may sound I do trust your judgment and have looked over a lot of your past articles (all of which and rightfully so discussing MMR and autism). Is there anything you could point me to which would maybe run down the basics of MMR? Why its dones at such a young age, and whether or not it is necessary at that young age for a child who will not be in daycare, etc etc.

    I know things like this drive bloggers nuts, and if any commentators (Non-tin foil hat please) know of a resource it would be much appreciated.

    Thanks

  16. #16 A non-troll
    September 27, 2007

    Aaargh… sorry about the typos. That’s what I get for not proofing after changing some wording.

  17. #17 Uncle Dave
    September 27, 2007

    Sorry, Lets not rule out the late in life pregnancy or older fathers correlation as a possiblity either.

  18. #18 Common Sense
    September 27, 2007

    A bad day for antivaccinationists? Are you high? A high profile person speaking out about the dangers of vaccinating children… on Larry King Live, The View, etc. etc… Pull your head out of your ass, Orac. Today is a wonderful day. Thousands of parents out there opening their minds and reading about toxic overload and vaccinations. It’s music to my ears.

    Vaccinations can HARM children. Period. End of story.

  19. #19 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    September 27, 2007

    There’s a deuterium oxide lobby?!

    Yes, but they are a secretive organization that doesn’t care about our children. They and the CDC want to suppress the tests being done by non scientific organizations that show the danger of 2H2O.

  20. #20 notmercury
    September 27, 2007

    Who do you think is responsible for Dick Cheney’s sinking ice cubes?

  21. #21 tourettist
    September 27, 2007

    Typical anti-vax spin going on at the Huffington Post.

  22. #22 rev_matt_y
    September 27, 2007

    Note that McCarthy smoked during pregnancy. Probably a more important factor than the vaccine as according to the National Autism Association there is a direct correlation between smoking during pregnancy in autism. I haven’t reviewed the research on that myself, but I’m well aware of the many other dangers associated with smoking during pregnancy so it wouldn’t come as a complete surprise if it increases the likelihood of autism as well. I found the NAA to be a remarkably balanced organization, by the way.

    For non-troll, I’ve got what I consider to be a decent explanation with useful links (including one back to here) at http://www.theonymous.com.

  23. #23 isles
    September 27, 2007

    Magnificent, Orac; the most comprehensive review yet of the study and its fallout.

  24. #24 Clare
    September 27, 2007

    HCN, Thanks for the link to the story in the Hackney Gazette. What struck me is that this is the exact same working class area where my great-grandmother lived around the end of the 19th century. She lost several children before they reached five years of age. She even kept the newspaper account of the inquest about one of them. There’s no way to tell what killed them from a contemporary vantage point, but I wouldn’t doubt that some disease that can now be prevented with immunizations was behind some of the deaths. That this could still be happening over a hundred years later, when proven methods to prevent measles and other dangerous diseases exist, boggles the mind.

  25. #25 HCN
    September 27, 2007

    non-troll said ” Why its dones at such a young age, and whether or not it is necessary at that young age for a child who will not be in daycare, etc etc.”

    The MMR is given after a child turns one year old. That is not as young as say the vaccine for pertussis or Hib (those two tend to kill babies). Even if your child is not in daycare, those bugs are at the playgrounds, playgroups, grocery stores and elsewhere (my baby who had neo-natal seizures was never vaccinated for pertussis, at a time our county had a pertussis epidemic — not fun! oh, he is 19 years old now).

    If you want some good reading material on vaccines, from theory, practice and a chapter on each vaccine preventable disease download the chapters from the Pink Book:
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/pink-chapters.htm

    For more information on the history of vaccines go to your library and check out these two books:
    _Vaccine_ by Arthur Allen
    _Vaccinated_ by Paul Offit

  26. #26 MartinM
    September 27, 2007

    A bad day for antivaccinationists? Are you high? A high profile person speaking out about the dangers of vaccinating children…

    …because as we all know, when it comes to scientific issues, celebrities trump research.

  27. #27 Rev. BigDumbChimp
    September 27, 2007

    Vaccinations can HARM children. Period. End of story.

    So CAN drinking too MUCH water. Or eating TOO much candy. OR listening to STUPID people FOR advice.

    It’s enlightening that you think that someone as unqualified as McCarthy speaking out on vaccinations is grounds for celebrating a win.

    OH YAY! Larry King’s show. We all know what a bastion of good science that place is.

  28. #28 Brendan S
    September 27, 2007

    You know, now that I sit down and think about it. The only place I’ve ever broken my arm (Or any bone) is at Church.

    Lutheran Churches harm kids! Period. End of Story.

  29. #29 notmercury
    September 27, 2007

    rev_matt_y: I found the NAA to be a remarkably balanced organization, by the way.

    Surely you don’t mean this NAA?
    http://www.pharmalive.com/News/index.cfm?articleid=478882&categoryid=40

  30. #30 Sandy
    September 27, 2007

    I’m wondering why not one of my six fully vaccinated offspring hasn’t turned crystal or indigo. All those vaccines for naught. Damn!

  31. #31 John
    September 27, 2007

    Martin makes an excellent point. The p value for significance when you do 42 tests should be <0.025, not 0.05. IOW, one SHOULD get a meaningless, yet “statistically significant” result in 2 of 42 measurements at p<0.05.

    Geneticists (who should know better) make this mistake frequently, too.

  32. #32 mike stanton
    September 27, 2007

    Bravo, Orac!

    and thanks for the links to the other blogs. You may want to add Arthur Allen’s piece on Huffpo.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arthur-allen/thimerosal-vindicated-in-_b_66143.html

  33. #33 Worse than Warren
    September 27, 2007

    Jenny McCarthy is a gift to the Enlightenment. A rational mind could not conceive of such a stupid spokesperson. Let her jabber away.

  34. #34 vlad
    September 27, 2007

    “vlad, I don’t think the manufacturers who are on vaccine advisory and CDC board care about these people so long as they are still making money from vaccines.” Really?

    So how come the anti vax group haven’t found proof that big pharma execs don’t vaccinate their own children? I know for a fact that one of them did. No we are not friends I know his daughter who is vaccinated. I think that would provide circumstantial evidence of something. You don’t hear about it because they do vaccinate their kids.

    Actually as for Aluminum it mainly dangerous when inhaled in vapor form during combustion liquification. Injecting it in large amounts over time maybe dangerous. The Aluminum in vaccines is in what state electrically?
    I said it for temerisol and the same thing for Aluminum. Where the hell are the up scaled trials that show Aluminum toxicity? By up scaled I mean the point of visible harm in experiment X is the equivalent of X mg/kg Al over t time. Show me any of this and I’ll listen. Oh, and show me the actual data so I can check for math errors.

  35. #35 Common Sense
    September 27, 2007

    “…because as we all know, when it comes to scientific issues, celebrities trump research”.

    You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.

  36. #36 wfjag
    September 27, 2007

    Dear non-troll:

    In addition to the CDC publication cited above, I’d suggest you start with the Quack Watch site, http://www.quackwatch.org/ and the associated sites in the Anti-Quackery Ring. One of the sites in the ring, the National Counsel Against Health Fraud, http://www.ncahf.org/ usually has excellent information or links to reliable sources.

    Dear Rev.BigDumbChimp:
    “2H2O poisoning””? Exactly how did your child get exposed to Heavy Water? Unless your child is drinking water used to moderate certain nuclear reactions, it doesn’t seem likely.

    I’m always willing to give someone a chance to document their claims — or fail to do so, since a lot of people read blogs like this and are willing to see if a claim has any basis in fact. However, it’s a bit hard to see how a child would be exposed to 2H2O, much less that such exposure is linked to autism.

    Dear Aluminumfree:
    The effects of aluminum poisoning are known. That can even cause neurological symptoms. However, that isn’t linked to autism. See, e.g., the MedicineNet.com article on aluminum at http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=39609, and Drs. Edwards and Barnett’s article on Aluminum Toxicity, at http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic113.htm

    As I said, I’m willing to give anyone a chance to show a factual basis for their claim.

  37. #37 Nat
    September 27, 2007

    Common sense said “Vaccinations can HARM children. Period. End of story.”

    This is actually true. Scary, huh? Not as scary as the alternative- which is to not vaccinate your children. Now that can really harm them. And not just your kids either. It can harm other people’s kids and adults as well.

    Until recently the anti-science anti-vaxination religion has been able to freeride on the herd immunity provided by all the responsible people getting themselves and their kids immunized. They are Freeloaders; cheating the rest of society. Sadly now that immunization prevalance is getting too low herd immunity is slipping. They and those they have scared away from the most cost effective medical interventions in all history are now running a serious risk of harm.

    But what really pisses me off is that those who haven’t freeloaded off the system, have got their shots (and incurred the small risk therein), but are not immune (no vaccine is 100% effective afterall) largely used to get protected by the herd immunity. Now these good citizens too have to pay the price that these freeloaders inflict on the rest of us.

    Being rational does not mean that you don’t care about people. Being rational means you care so much that you actually want the right answers to the important questions that affect people’s lives.

    ___END OF DIATRIBE____

  38. #38 IAMB
    September 27, 2007

    Rev. Chimp, you really should come up with some sort of “Warning: satire ahead” tag for your posts…

    You remind me of a guy who set up a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide…

    For those who don’t get the joke, before you jump all over Chimp, it’s 2H2 + O2 => 2H2O

  39. #39 Brian
    September 27, 2007

    wfjag, I believe (hope?) that the good Rev. was joking about heavy water. I think.

  40. #40 Brian
    September 27, 2007

    Yes, that’s what I had initially thought. Then, I thought perhaps he was attempting to make such an outlandish claim that it couldn’t possibly be true.

    But it jives much better with his claims about this clearly evil substance.

  41. #41 Kev
    September 28, 2007

    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!”

    LOL!

    Thank you Sue. Out of all the really, really dumb things you have said this is by far the funniest. Is Jenny your science?

  42. #42 Orac
    September 28, 2007

    Kev’s right. Sue’s statement about Jenny McCarthy and her story trumping science was just so outrageously, over-the-top idiotic that it’s hard to decide whether to laugh uproariously at the sheer stupidity of it or to weep that so many people like her are so deficient in critical thinking skills.

  43. #43 Common Sense
    September 28, 2007

    “But what really pisses me off is that those who haven’t freeloaded off the system, have got their shots (and incurred the small risk therein), but are not immune (no vaccine is 100% effective afterall) largely used to get protected by the herd immunity”.

    Not immune? You mean that the vaccines don’t work? There’s a shocker …

  44. #44 Common Sense
    September 28, 2007

    “Thank you Sue. Out of all the really, really dumb things you have said this is by far the funniest. Is Jenny your science”?

    Oh, Kev, you dope… She’s not “my science”… She’s another mother who knows that vaccinations injured her child. She spoke it outloud on national tv. Thousands of other mothers will hear her story and relate. They will “get it”. It’s simple and wonderful. Too bad you can’t see that … You are none too bright. I would like to congratulate you on your new set up for your website… you have officially moved into the irrelevant category now.

    It’s a good time to be a anti-vaccination nut…

  45. #45 Common Sense
    September 28, 2007

    “Kev’s right. Sue’s statement about Jenny McCarthy and her story trumping science was just so outrageously, over-the-top idiotic that it’s hard to decide whether to laugh uproariously at the sheer stupidity of it or to weep that so many people like her are so deficient in critical thinking skills”.

    Another dope like Kev who doesn’t understand that half the battle is that people don’t hear others talk about the biomedical aspect of autism. People don’t hear others talk openly and honestly about vaccinations triggering health issues in children. Ah, you guys… question for you… Can you walk and chew gum at the same time? Just curious…

  46. #46 wfjag
    September 28, 2007

    “wfjag, I believe (hope?) that the good Rev. was joking about heavy water. I think.”

    Dear Brian: While I hope you’re right, in years of dealing with my ex, and her altie relatives (her brother’s a D.C.) and friends, I’ve heard much stranger claims made with perfect seriousness.

  47. #47 Brian
    September 28, 2007

    half the battle is that people don’t hear others talk about the biomedical aspect of autism.

    Half the battle? I would think that the need for such discussion is proportional to the evidence warranting it.

  48. #48 Inter Verbal
    September 28, 2007

    Hmmmm….

    Jenny McCarthy or science, Jenny McCarthy or science…

    Tough choice here.

  49. #49 MartinM
    September 28, 2007

    Not immune? You mean that the vaccines don’t work?

    And this, in a nutshell, is why we need to be precise when discussing significance. Someone stupid/dishonest enough to parse “vaccines are not 100% effective” as “vaccines don’t work” is hardly going to understand/consider the subtleties of multiple hypothesis testing. Unless some of those 42 tests returned p-values considerably lower than 0.05, the correct way to report the results is ‘no statistically significant associations.’

  50. #50 IAMB
    September 28, 2007

    Hmmmm….

    Jenny McCarthy or science, Jenny McCarthy or science…

    Tough choice here.

    Boobies!

    (Sorry, Orac… couldn’t help it.)

  51. #51 Bronze Dog
    September 28, 2007

    I’m reminded of a troll who demanded 100% safety for everything, despite us pointing out the hypocrisy of driving her children to school. After all, driving is not 100% safe.

    And then you’ve got people who reject anything that comes out 100% as a conspiracy, even if it did perform that well in independent tests.

    My TV remote works about 80% of the time when I push the power button. Does that mean that I hallucinated those times it responded correctly?

  52. #52 Common Sense
    September 28, 2007

    “And this, in a nutshell, is why we need to be precise when discussing significance. Someone stupid/dishonest enough to parse “vaccines are not 100% effective” as “vaccines don’t work” is hardly going to understand/consider the subtleties of multiple hypothesis testing. Unless some of those 42 tests returned p-values considerably lower than 0.05, the correct way to report the results is ‘no statistically significant associations.”

    Another dope. Martin, anyone who cannot see that vaccines trigger autoimmune and neurological damage in children should not be allowed to make vaccination decisions for children. End of story.

  53. #53 Joseph
    September 28, 2007

    Common Sense said:

    Martin, anyone who cannot see that vaccines trigger autoimmune and neurological damage in children should not be allowed to make vaccination decisions for children. End of story.

    I’m convinced. I mean, who are you going to believe, science, or someone named “Common Sense”? You have to go with common sense, don’t you?

  54. #54 another dope
    September 28, 2007

    To all dopes: stop feeding the dope.. I mean troll.

  55. #55 Fatigued
    September 28, 2007

    AluminumFree-

    I have seen your story and list of aluminum woes so many times at different sites. Do you simply keep a copy of it on your computer, ready to post at a moment’s notice? Is it on a placard outside your place of residence?

    Aluminum causes car accidents and suicides? Will that evil metal stop at nothing?!?

  56. #56 tourettist
    September 28, 2007

    I wanna know how Colbert weighs in. Truthiness trumps all.

  57. #57 clone3g
    September 28, 2007

    Common sensemilia said: Martin, anyone who cannot see that vaccines trigger autoimmune and neurological damage in children should not be allowed to make vaccination decisions for children.

    Hey Sue, you don’t treat your kids with alpha-Lipoic Acid do you? You know, to get the mercury out.

  58. #58 Common Sense
    September 28, 2007

    “Hey Sue, you don’t treat your kids with alpha-Lipoic Acid do you? You know, to get the mercury out”.

    Ah, no clown, I don’t … Thanks for playing.

  59. #59 Paul Norman
    September 28, 2007

    Aluminum causes car accidents and suicides? Will that evil metal stop at nothing?!?

    Aluminum has been involved in nearly every aircraft accident over the last 40 years!

  60. #60 clone3g
    September 28, 2007

    Just wondering ‘cuz ALA can trigger autoimmunity toward insulin and I know a lot of your friends make their kids gobble that stuff down. I have to wonder if they should be allowed to make healthcare decisions for children.

  61. #61 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  62. #62 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  63. #63 Prometheus
    September 28, 2007

    Sallie Bernard had months to complain about the design of the study – and there was no embargo on that information – yet she said nothing until the results were in.

    It seems a little post hoc to complain about a study design – that she had a hand in making – only after discovering that she didn’t like the results.

    “Common Sense” makes the all-too-common error of confusing popular belief with reality. To him/her, if the masses believe it, it must be true. Especially if an actor or model is talking about it.

    As for people “telling their story” – that is often entertaining, but not exactly science. There are people “telling their story” about how they were abducted by aliens – there are people “telling their story” about how they saw “Bigfoot” and a lot of other nonsense.

    The sad fact is that “people” often misinterpret the data that they receive through their senses, let alone stuff they hear but barely understand from other people (who themselves often know only enough to pronounce the words).

    The “concerns” of “Aluminumfree” are interesting in that they represent the next logical step in the anti-vaccine movement’s campaign to link vaccines to autism any way they can.

    Now that thimerosal is sunk as a potential causative agent for autism, the step that a number of “autism advocacy” groups have taken is to move the target to “other components” of vaccines.

    Aluminium is another such target – attractive because there is already a folk-movement of anti-aluminium hysteria for the anti-vaccine movement to build on. Of course, if the CDC hasn’t learned its lesson with thimerosal and spends the money to show that aluminium doesn’t cause autism, then the anti-vaccinationists will simply pick another real or imaginary component of vaccines.

    These maneuvers have the potential to keep the “vaccines-cause-autism” movement alive for decades.

    Of course, the only people who will benefit, in the end, will be the ringleaders, who gain fame, power, political influence and even money from their deceived followers.

    The ringleaders may even believe what they are saying, but that doesn’t make them right. And I have to wonder about the self-honesty of people who can one year claim, “Autism is mercury poisoning. The End.” and the next year say, “It was never just about mercury…”

    They’re lying to somebody, even if it’s just themselves.

    Prometheus

  64. #64 HCN
    September 28, 2007

    Prometheus said “Aluminium is another such target – attractive because there is already a folk-movement of anti-aluminium hysteria for the anti-vaccine movement to build on. …snip…

    Of course, the only people who will benefit, in the end, will be the ringleaders, who gain fame, power, political influence and even money from their deceived followers. ”

    And they shall be the Aluminati!!!

    (sorry, I could not resist)

  65. #65 Common Sense
    September 28, 2007

    “Just wondering ‘cuz ALA can trigger autoimmunity toward insulin and I know a lot of your friends make their kids gobble that stuff down”.

    Oh, my… you’re kidding me? ALA can trigger autoimmunity toward insulin but vaccines containing mercury and aluminum are completely safe… Wow, Clown… You are sooooo smart. (This is the hypocrital crap that I have to deal with here). Big sigh.

    Dope, wake up…

  66. #66 Ruth
    September 28, 2007

    Only yeast-raised (avoid the nasty alum in baking powder), gluten and dairy-free baked goods for kids. Or do they get yeasty from yeast? Yuck!
    The cases I’ve seen of actual Al poisoning have been from prolonged kidney dialysis. Al is the most abundant metal on Earth, kinda hard to avoid exposure.

    And how many actresses have been harmed by their Botox injections? Botulina is way more toxic than even dimethyl mercury. But of course toxic means toxic at any dose.

  67. #67 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  68. #68 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  69. #69 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  70. #70 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  71. #71 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  72. #72 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  73. #73 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  74. #74 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  75. #75 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  76. #76 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  77. #77 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  78. #78 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  79. #79 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  80. #80 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  81. #81 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  82. #82 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  83. #83 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  84. #84 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  85. #85 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  86. #86 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  87. #87 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  88. #88 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  89. #89 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  90. #90 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  91. #91 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  92. #92 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  93. #93 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  94. #94 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  95. #95 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  96. #96 Jenny McCarthy? Smart??
    September 28, 2007

    All Too Common Nonsense said about Jenny (Dumb Bunny) McCarthy:
    “You got it. Smart and well spoken celebs talking about their own personal stories and backing it up with thousands more… trumps dopey suits trying to peddle their wares anyday… You go Jenny!

    Vaccines are dangerous. Period. End of story.”

    That’s just way to funny Sue. Jenny McCarthy “smart”? Was she smart when she was smoking all through her pregnancy? Was she smart when she decided to get her son circumcised her son so his private parts would be “pretty”? Was she smart when she went on TV and said he had signs of autism, “flapping,” at age 12 mos, then said the flapping and everything started after the MMR on Larry King? Was she smart when she discouraged moms from breast feeding in her “Baby Laughs” book by calling the nursing specialist in the hospital a “Nursing Nazi”? Was she smart when she can’t keep it straight if he’s normal now or not? He’s still speaking (delayed) echolalically from what I heard on the video clips.

    What’s this about “legal narcotics” she keeps talking about? If she’s been doing street drugs, did she do them during her pregnancy, too?

    Jenny McCarthy is hysterical, and not in the funny way, she’s a blithering, Indigo tainted idiot, common as any two-bit street walker, and a liar.

    As for you, Sue, anyone who says, “Vaccines are dangerous end of story” is dangerous, an idiot or a liar, too.

  97. #97 trrll
    September 28, 2007

    If you want a significance level of 0.05 overall, and you’re doing 42 separate tests, the appropriate significance level for each test should be substantially lower.

    It depends upon whether you regard them as 42 separate tests or as 42 parts of one big test. By this argument, it would be perfectly OK for several studies to each examine a few of these measures with a p < 0.05 criterion, yet wrong for one big study to examine all of them with the same criterion. This seems more than a little counterintuitive, considering that the amount of actual information provided to a reader of the literature is the same.

    And of course, if they set a more stringent criterion, they would have been accused by the anti-VAXers of setting an impossible-to-meet criterion for statistical significance in order to conceal the damaging effects of vaccination.

    The alternative is to use the standard p < 0.05 criterion, while acknowledging that a fraction of the assays will meet this criterion by chance. This seems to me to be perfectly legitimate so long as you report all of the results, without trying to sweep the ones you don’t like under the carpet. No significance level is a perfect shield against error, because no matter what criterion you choose, if there are enough studies, some will come out the wrong way by chance.

  98. #98 trrll
    September 28, 2007

    If you want a significance level of 0.05 overall, and you’re doing 42 separate tests, the appropriate significance level for each test should be substantially lower.

    It depends upon whether you regard them as 42 separate tests or as 42 parts of one big test. By this argument, it would be perfectly OK for several studies to each examine a few of these measures with a p less than 0.05 criterion, yet wrong for one big study to examine all of them with the same criterion. This seems more than a little counterintuitive, considering that the amount of actual information provided to a reader of the literature is the same.

    And of course, if they set a more stringent criterion, they would have been accused by the anti-VAXers of setting an impossible-to-meet criterion for statistical significance in order to conceal the damaging effects of vaccination.

    The alternative is to use the standard p less than 0.05 criterion, while acknowledging that a fraction of the assays will meet this criterion by chance. This seems to me to be perfectly legitimate so long as you report all of the results, without trying to sweep the ones you don’t like under the carpet. No significance level is a perfect shield against error, because no matter what criterion you choose, if there are enough studies, some will come out the wrong way by chance.

  99. #99 Joseph
    September 28, 2007

    Sue: Are you upset with GR that they didn’t find vaccines to be a risk factor for diabetes? Just wondering.

  100. #100 Joseph
    September 28, 2007

    If you want a significance level of 0.05 overall, and you’re doing 42 separate tests, the appropriate significance level for each test should be substantially lower.

    I prefer the way they presented the results. There were actually 370 or so different measures. If each has a 95% confidence interval, you would expect that 18.9 of the measures would have a 1.0 RR outside the CI. They found 19 were.

    It raises a question as to whether studies should generally consider this when presenting multiple CIs, even if it’s 2 of them. It also highlights that it is easy to bias results by looking at many CIs and only picking the ones you like. Cranks could easily find this to be a profitable technique in their “studies”. (What am I saying; this was already done by Generation Rescue in their survey information page.)

  101. #101 clone3g
    September 28, 2007

    CS: “Oh, my… you’re kidding me? ALA can trigger autoimmunity toward insulin but vaccines containing mercury and aluminum are completely safe.”

    Who is claiming that vaccines are completely safe, Sue? Percentage wise, ALA may carry more risks. Will you go on the chelation lists and warn them all? You are duty bound to protect children and parents from dangerous products, no?

  102. #102 aluminumfree
    September 28, 2007

    Sorry to hear about the 2H2O poisoning…how tragic. Maybe if you write Jenny McCarthy she can do talk show circuits for your child.

    I discovered aluminum in vaccines without influence from aluminati I suppose I have joined. After my son’s reaction I was merely looking for any ingredients in my son’s vaccines which could have caused his complete overnight loss of speech, and found loss of speech and swelling of brain listed on AAP website in a couple of articles on aluminum. We did blood and hair tests, and he had aluminum poisoning. I am sure given aluminum prevalence in environment and typical diet that his poisoning did not come only from vaccines, but his symptoms did appear within 24 hours of the shots, and were mostly reversed as other case studies of aluminum induced neuropathy have been.

    http://tinyurl.com/22mn88
    case studies on Macrophagic myofasciitis in children; other related studies also available on pubmed, espec by Gherardi.

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22.html
    ATSDR aluminum toxicological profile

    http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/336/22/1557
    New England Journal of Medicine Study showing how aluminum in IV feeding solutions at 19 and 44 micrograms aluminum per kilogram body weight of preterm infants receiving the solutions causes decrease in cognitive function per day the babies were given aluminum contaminated solutions in IVs
    By comparison,
    At birth average baby is 7.4 lbs, receiving 250 mcgs aluminum in hep B vaccine or 34 micrograms per kg body weight.
    At 2 months well check, average baby is 4.2 kg…getting as much as 1200 micrograms aluminum or roughly 285 micrograms per kg from various combinations of recommended vaccines from different manufacturers in one day from Prevnar, DTaP, Hep B, HiB
    At 4 months, average baby is 5.2 kg; again with as much as 1200 micrograms aluminum in one well baby visit or 230 micrograms per kg from combined recommended vaccines,
    Average 15 month old…almost 11 kg…potential dose 1200 mcg aluminum or 109 mcg aluminum per kg in one day.
    17 kg = average 4 yo weight… aluminum exposure from DTaP is 330 mcg or 19 micrograms per kilogram
    37 kg = weight of average 11 yo girl / aluminum exposure is 615 micrograms or 16 mcg per kg for recommended Gardasil and TDAP vaccines.
    125 micrograms aluminum in each dose prevnar
    330 micrograms aluminum in daptacel
    800 micrograms aluminum in DTaP Hib
    250 micrograms aluminum in hep b
    225 mcg aluminum in each dose Gardasil
    250 mcg aluminum in Hep A vaccine/ or 20 mcg/kg for avg 2 year old who gets this vaccine
    TDaP 390 mcg aluminum

    Understood preterm infant excretion of aluminum is different than full term infant or otherwise healthy toddler. Understood vaccines are not injected intravenously as these solutions are. Similar studies in infants and adults show dementia caused by low levels of aluminum in IV solutions, and that small increases in aluminum lead to increases in neurological disorders. Not best studies but the only ones showing injected aluminum effects instead of ingested ones CDC uses. Haven’t found data specific to vaccines or how fast aluminum goes from muscle tissue to bloodstream.

    Would be better if vaccine manufacturers did not use aluminum in their placebos during safety trials. I have never seen a good explantation for why the most neurotoxic ingredient in the vaccine would be added to the placebo during safety trials…why not good ol’ saline?

    http://www.plasbumin.com/web_docs/WP_Aluminum%20Toxicity.pdf
    effects of aluminum in various sources and effects with respect to children

  103. #103 Brian
    September 29, 2007

    Aluminumfree, as I have a relatively busy morning, you’ll forgive me if my answer is not as comprehensive or fleshed-out as I’d like it to be. Perhaps later this afternoon I will return to reply in more detail.

    To answer points in your most recent comment:
    The conclusions of the NEJM article you cite is applicable only to preterm infants. The fact that the route is different is also VERY significant, and the difference between IV and IM can be as large as that between PO and IV, IIRC. It is reckless to try to generalize these results in any way in order to support your position.

    The reason the aluminum is included in the control is pretty simple. The test is to see if the vaccine is safe, but in order to draw meaningful conclusions about the vaccine’s safety, you must test the vaccine against its vehicle, not a completely different solution. This way, the only independent variable is the presence or absence of the vaccine itself.

  104. #104 Common Sense
    September 29, 2007

    “Who is claiming that vaccines are completely safe, Sue”?

    LOL!

    “Will you go on the chelation lists and warn them all? You are duty bound to protect children and parents from dangerous products, no”?

    Why would I do that? Silly…

  105. #105 Common Sense
    September 29, 2007

    “Sue: Are you upset with GR that they didn’t find vaccines to be a risk factor for diabetes? Just wondering”.

    Am I *upset* with them? What a stupid thing to say, Joseph… why would I be *upset* with them? Have your head examined.

  106. #106 kev
    September 29, 2007

    C’mon guys, ease off Sue. She doesn’t do anything unless Jenny says its OK to do so first. Vaccines are bad m’kay? Bigfoot exists m’kay? She wouldn’t tell anybody anything on a chelation list as that would mean having some integrity and some consistency. Sue’s still getting her head around the idea that celebs aren’t gods ;o)

    From now on Sue, when I picture you, it will be as one of those screaming teens that follow boybands around, crying when they don’t get noticed….Jenny, I love you!! Please notice me Jenny!!

  107. #107 Common Sense
    September 29, 2007

    Kev,

    Don’t you have some meds to take now?

    As for me wanting to be noticed by Jenny? No silly. I want Jenny to wake up parents that’s all… no more, no less. You, on the other hand, seem to be the one screaming for attention.

  108. #108 Shiritai
    September 29, 2007

    Common Sense,

    You’ve had 11 posts on this thread, yet you’ve brought no evidence or arguements that support your view. In fact, nearly all of your posts have consisted solely of snide comments, adding nothing to this discussion. You’ve shown no interest in arguing your point or hearing other’s arguements. Common Sense, I dub thee Troll.

    I don’t think there is anything to be gained responding to the one named “Common Sense”. Her posts are pure pathos.

  109. #109 Joseph
    September 29, 2007

    Am I *upset* with them? What a stupid thing to say, Joseph… why would I be *upset* with them? Have your head examined.

    Because you do seem more cranky than usual (no pun intended). I was just wondering if that was the reason.

  110. #110 wfjag
    September 29, 2007

    “Of course, the only people who will benefit, in the end, will be the ringleaders, who gain fame, power, political influence and even money from their deceived followers.”

    Old bureaucracies never die, they just re-write their mission statement. One of the bettr known examples was the Mothers’ March for Dimes to fight polio. Then you ruddy scientists went and found vaccines that pretty much eliminated it. So, they found a new mission — fighting “birth defects.”

    Prometheus, you might want to expand on your response in one of your postings. There’s a lot of people’s careers, reputations and income tied up in “proving” that vaccines cause something terrible. If not, it’s hard to keep those donations and membership dues coming in.

  111. #111 Common Sense
    September 30, 2007

    “You’ve had 11 posts on this thread, yet you’ve brought no evidence or arguements that support your view. In fact, nearly all of your posts have consisted solely of snide comments, adding nothing to this discussion”

    Dearest Shiritai,

    Clearly you are new to this issue and have *zero* knowledge in the topic. You really should do some homework and/or research and then come back to discuss.

  112. #112 Common Sense
    September 30, 2007

    “Because you do seem more cranky than usual (no pun intended). I was just wondering if that was the reason”.

    Crankier? Not at all… In fact, I’m more than thrilled that thousands upon thousands of parents have recently heard about vaccinations being unsafe and biomedical treatments. Definitely NOT cranky.

  113. #113 aluminumfree
    October 1, 2007

    The conclusions of the NEJM article you cite is applicable only to preterm infants. The fact that the route is different is also VERY significant, and the difference between IV and IM can be as large as that between PO and IV, IIRC. It is reckless to try to generalize these results in any way in order to support your position.

    The reason the aluminum is included in the control is pretty simple. The test is to see if the vaccine is safe, but in order to draw meaningful conclusions about the vaccine’s safety, you must test the vaccine against its vehicle, not a completely different solution. This way, the only independent variable is the presence or absence of the vaccine itself.

    Brian,

    Where are the tests that show the vaccine as a whole are safe, then? Aside from 72 hour studies of a few adjuvanted vaccines for localized skin reactions, I haven’t seen any. Pretty serious considering these are being injected into developing babies. I am thinking of how long it took to approve changes to US baby formula to add Omega fatty acids. And these are things that are good for babies! Aluminum has definitely been shown to be bad for babies and AAP mentions on their web site exposure should be minimized. Yet there seems to be no concern for injecting it into babies when new vaccines are considered.

    If you think this study is poor comparison, how about this: aluminum in soy based infant formula has been shown to cause developmental and cognitive problems in infants. Now, using data from several parenting websites, I gather that infants consume approx 275-300 liters of formula in their first year. Sources on this vary but soy infant formulas have been found to contain approx 1400 micrograms aluminum per liter soy formula. That makes estimated exposure to aluminum from one year of soy infant formula roughly 400,000 micrograms aluminum. This is generous estimate since most babies are not fed soy formula for the entire year…start out with breastmilk, switch to milk based formula, then to soy in most cases. But bottom line somewhere around 400,000 micrograms of aluminum consumed during the infancy is what is thought to have caused developmental and cognitive delays in these babies. Now, aluminum is very poorly absorbed through the gut…only 0.1-0.3 % makes it across the intestines to the blood. SO multiplying 400,000 by .001 and .003 we get 400 to 1200 micrograms aluminum getting into bloodstream and causing this damage. Again even if very generous considering maybe babies’ intestines are not so protective and let a little more aluminum through…say 1% or 2% (highest amount of aluiminum passing through intestines I found in literature on this subject)….then 4000 to 8000 micrograms might be generous estimate of the amount of aluminum which got into these babies’ bloodstream and caused the brain damage.

    If you add up all of the aluminum in all of the shot recommended for babies under current CDC guidelines during first year you get…just over 3500 micrograms aluminum injected into infant muscle tissue. Do you think this could be causing brain damage to some of these babies? Vaccine aluminum is given in large doses every couple of months versus smaller daily amounts in formula. By the way babies get another dose of 1200 micrograms aluminum at 12-15 months well visit as well (when most symptoms of autism such as developmental regression develop). Do you think it would be warranted to perform safety trials on injecting aluminum into babies via vaccines?

    I don’t think the comparison of vaccines to IV fluids is off so much, in absence of other data showing it is safe. 100% of the aluminum definitely makes it into the body somehow, unlike ingestion with its low rate of absorption. The amount of aluminum is not just a little more than known amount causing damage, it is several times more, at each well visit! I think it at least warrants better safety trials.

  114. #114 Brian
    October 1, 2007

    Common Sense, let’s get some information straight.

    1. Aluminum has been used as an adjuvant in vaccines for over 70 years. In that time, it has become fairly well understood and characterized as a vaccine additive.

    2. It is used not just for kicks, but because it has been found to enhance immune responses after innoculation. In other words, it is used because it has demonstrated positive effects.

    3. According to the ATSDR, the safe exposure level for humans to Al is 2 mg/kg/day. This is after adjusting the safe dose in animal studies by a factor of 10 to account for uncertainty in human safe dose.

    So even if your estimates are very low (which I actually think they are), it is still unlikely that a child will receive more than the safe dose of aluminum from vaccines injected IM.

    Are there risks? You bet. Just like any other medication or procedure. And as with any medication or medical intervention, patient variability plays a role. But in general, the safety and efficacy of vaccines containing aluminum as an adjuvant has been demonstrated over the course of 70+ years.

    P.S. – I’m surprised you didn’t report your figures in yg. Now those numbers would have looked big!

  115. #115 Brian
    October 1, 2007

    Oh, by the way, this info was found at this site and by searching around at the ATSDR site.

  116. #116 Brian
    October 1, 2007

    One more thing:

    Where are the tests that show the vaccine as a whole are safe, then?

    What do you think vaccines are, anyway? They are manufactured and treated by the FDA as drugs, and are therefore subject to the exact same toxicological studies, teratology studies, clinical studies, etc., as any other medicine.

    Generally, trials are performed with the inclusion of the adjuvant.

  117. #117 aluminumfree
    October 1, 2007

    No, Brian, they are not. The trials are either those using aluminum in placebo or those comparing adjuvanted vaccines to another adjuvanted vaccine (most of the vaccines new ones are compared to also have higher amount of aluminum than the one being introduced. If you look at rules for vaccines versus rules for other drugs you will see difference in safety trial requirements as well as others. Drugs DO have to have non-reactive placebo in safety trials AND rate of side effects listed on advertisements in magazines, as well as long term efficacy and safety. Ever see this with a vaccine? The only comparison to non-reactive placebo I’ve seen is 72 hour study after vaccine for localized skin reaction. No long term safety trials published for vaccines, though manufacturers do long term efficacy…wouldn’t be too hard to ask when these babies met developmental milestones or if they had any diagnosed neurological disorders when they are checking in on participants to see if they got the VPD during the study, or to look for signs associated with autism…sudden increase in head circumference (associated with aluminum exposure…Al known to cause swelling of the brain).

    Just because vaccines have contained aluminum for 70 years doesn’t make it safe…kids are getting so many more vaccines than they were 70 years ago. Also our diets have changed to contain more food dyes, anticaking agents and aluminum baking powder with aluminum than before, people are getting more water from municipal sources which contains added aluminum, and acid rain is leaching more dangerous forms of aluminum into our drinking water. Children have much greater exposure to aluminum than 70 years ago, and now we know it is much more dangerous than we did then. And in the beginning no safety trials for aluminum were ever performed anyway. Now is the time to change this.

    I didn’t use micrograms in these comparisons to make it look more dangerous. Most of the studies I read referred to aluminum dose in micrograms. In any case, the amount in vaccines (which has never been tested for safety) is larger than or similar to dose known to cause neurological and cognitive problems in two studies of both injected and ingested aluminum. If it maked you happy, converted to milligrams, the amount in vaccines is still bigger than amount in two widely accepted and repeated studies where aluminum was shown to cause harm.:)

    PS I do understand and appreciate why aluminum is in vaccines. Aluminum causes increased immune response to the vaccine but also to any odd allergen/antigen in the body at time of vaccination, including to the body itself. Asthma has been shown to increase after vaccination with adjuvanted vaccines as well, in several studies. Food allergies, auto-immune disorders, irritable bowel disorders, seizures and tics are also associated with aluminum (and mercury), and have increased in all children but are very prevalent in autistic children, as are low muscle tone, learning disorders, developmental delays, ADD/ADHD…also on the rise.

  118. #118 Shiritai
    October 1, 2007

    aluminumfree,

    “Food allergies, auto-immune disorders, irritable bowel disorders, seizures and tics are also associated with aluminum (and mercury), and have increased in all children but are very prevalent in autistic children, as are low muscle tone, learning disorders, developmental delays, ADD/ADHD…also on the rise.”

    I am not aware of any increase in any of these problems that is not due to increased testing or a change in criteria. If you know of such a study, please link it.

    Also, blaming aluminum in vaccines for developmental disorders is very strange. Aluminum does not bioaccumulate, which is why acute poisoning is usually only found in those with renal failure or those who get constant large doses from their environment.

  119. #119 Brian
    October 1, 2007

    Honestly, CommonSense, I’m getting tired of this. Go read 21 CFR 610.15 before you spout any more shite.

  120. #120 Common Sense
    October 1, 2007

    “Honestly, CommonSense, I’m getting tired of this. Go read 21 CFR 610.15 before you spout any more shite”.

    Dearest Brian,

    You nitwit! If you actually read what people post you will see that you have been conversing with aluminumfree and not with yours truly, CommonSense… Do you have difficulty reading?

  121. #121 Brian
    October 1, 2007

    No need to call me a nitwit. My apologies. You guys’ posts just kind of blend together.

  122. #122 Mom and Lawyer
    October 12, 2007

    Thank you for this. So many parents that I know do not vaccinate their children b/c of autism fears . . . to the detriment of everyone. I had read through the CDC study and have both had the flu vaccine (I’m in my 2nd trimester currently) and have vaccinated my 20 month old for the flu (as well as everything else). Many parents (the Evidence of Harmers) have told me that I am not acting in the best interest of my child and child-to-be: it is refreshing to be able to simply send people a link as opposed to have to try to wade through all the mierda myself.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.