My topic yesterday was When doctors betray their profession. In my post, I talked about some very unethical doctors representing tobacco companies in lawsuits against them seeking compensation for death and injury due to smoking, as well as to doctors and scientists peddling pseudoscience and quackery representing claimants in the Autism Omnibus action several years ago, in essence supporting the scientifically unsupported idea that vaccines cause autism. The reason I brought this up was to show doctors behaving badly in “conventional” and not-so-conventional medical-legal situations. Unfortunately, that’s not all the physician shenanigans that go on. Indeed, a reader of mine (who wishes to remain anonymous) attended a recent vaccine “open house” in Culver City, CA on July 16 and provided me with an account of the goings-on there. This particular antivaccine event was remarkable because it featured a frequent topic of this blog, antivaccine pediatrician Robert “Dr. Bob” Sears. It was a meeting advertised on Dr. Bob’s Facebook page a week ago, in which he promised:

We’ll discuss how SB 277 will affect your family next year, what you can do about it, and what efforts are being made to overturn the new law. Learn what your options are and understand which children will be exempt from the new vaccine requirements. Join me, Eric Gladen, Melissa Floyd, and others for an eventful informative discussion and Q and A. See you there.

Dr. Bob, you remember, is famous for writing a “skeptical” vaccine book beloved by the antivaccine movement. More recently, he’s been a vocal critic of SB 277, even going so far as to take a cue from the whackjob wing of the antivaccine movement and sarcastically suggest that its passage would lead to, in essence, nonvaccinating parents and children being forced to wear the vaccine equivalent of the yellow Star of David that the Nazis forced Jews to wear for easy identification and ostracization. Yes, Dr. Bob went full Godwin over SB 277, after a history of blowing the antivaccine dog whistles such as “freedom” and “parental rights.”

SB 277 is, of course, the recently passed California law that will eliminate religious and personal belief exemptions (PBEs) to school vaccine mandates. It is a law that I had never thought possible before, particularly in California given that California is ground zero for the antivaccine movement in the US, particularly affluent areas in the Bay area, Hollywood and Santa Monica, and Dr. Bob’s neck of the woods in Capistrano Beach, just north of San Diego, where Dr. Bob caters to just such a clientele. Assuming the notes I was given are accurate (and I have no reason to believe they are not), it shows Dr. Bob behaving just as badly as any of those tobacco company expert witnesses trying to deny that it was most likely tobacco that caused head and neck cancer in plantiffs suing tobacco companies. Basically, Dr. Bob gave a workshop to parents on how to keep on avoiding vaccinating while at the same time making, in essence, a pitch for business from nonvaccinating parents looking for a physician to write a letter recommending a medical exemption. This should not be surprising, given that Dr. Bob has of late been letting his antivaccine freak flag fly more. Indeed, at the recent conservative/libertarian confab known as FreedomFest a week and a half ago, Dr. Bob debated Ron Bailey on the issue of whether vaccines should be mandatory. Basically, he played Julian Whitaker’s role from a similar debate hosted by FreedomFest three years ago; i.e., the antivaccine side.

In any event, the antivaccine town hall in Culver City started with a long PowerPoint presentation full of antivaccine misinformation and errors that was over an hour long. Dr. Bob didn’t give this presentation, and my reader didn’t say who did. It doesn’t matter much, anyway, because Dr. Bob was clearly the star of the show and spoke next. After stating how much he hates the law and acknowledging how much all the attendees hate the law, he got into his main topic, namely how to comply with the law without vaccinating. From the notes I’m adapting and turning into my usual jaunty prose, his talk was chock full of misinformation and disingenuousness. You can get some idea of the sorts of things Dr. Bob said by checking out this Facebook post from three weeks ago. His talk basically stuck to the same outline, with some additions that perhaps he didn’t want to put in writing.

First, if you don’t think Dr. Bob is antivaccine, consider this. He started out by referring to autism as a “known side effect” of vaccines. It is not, and he knows it. If he doesn’t know it, he is utterly incompetent in evaluating evidence or was cynically pandering to his audience. Take your pick. He also told the audience that the American Academy of Pediatrics will issue guidelines about medical exemptions, but that it will be “much narrower than” what he does. (Surprise! Surprise!) Anyone want to guess whether he’ll be even more looser in issuing exemptions than Dr. Jay Gordon will be? My guess is that he will, as Dr. Jay seems unwilling to stretch things too far beyond what is medically justifiable, at least comparatively speaking.

Among the tidbits of information Dr. Bob dropped on his audience were:

  • A description of an effort to amend the law to allow chiropractors and naturopaths to issue medical exemptions. I know antivaccinationists tried to get that slipped into SB 277 and failed. One can only hope the legislature doesn’t fall for that one. If you think Dr. Bob will give an exemption to virtually anyone who wants one, just let chiropractors and naturopaths write exemptions based on “aggregate toxicity” or something like that.
  • A suggestion that parents seek out a DO because, or so Dr. Bob thinks, they tend to be more “open minded” than MDs. Personally, this hasn’t been my experience, at least not in the US, but I don’t know many DO pediatricians or primary care docs. One of the best surgical intensivists I ever knew was a DO, as is one of the premier phase I cancer clinical trialists in the country.
  • Another suggestion that parents seek out physicians in solo or small private practices rather than larger groups. The reason for this one to me is obvious. Larger groups tend to have more explicitly codified practice guidelines.

Aligning himself with his audience, Dr. Bob stated “We have to work on the way we have been perceived—we have been maligned.” The “we,” of course, are parents who attend sessions given by antivaccine doctors on how to comply with SB 277 and still refuse to vaccinate; i.e., antivaccinationists.

Here’s where Dr. Bob got into the nitty-gritty of telling parents just how they can do that. Remember that the law doesn’t take effect until the 2016-2017 school year. So, according to Dr. Bob, here are the ways to get around the law other than home schooling. The first method is to et an Individualized Education Program (IEP) that specifies regular classroom time. For those who have no experience with them, let me briefly explain. IEPs are mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for children with special needs. If a child receives special educations services, he must have an IEP that includes a description of how the child is doing, the child’s specific annual education goals, specific special education supports and services that the school will provide to help the child reach those goals, modifications and accommodations the school will provide to help the child make progress, and other information. To comply with federal law, SB 277 specifically stipulates that the law “does not prohibit a pupil who qualifies for an individualized education program, pursuant to federal law and Section 56026 of the Education Code, from accessing any special education and related services required by his or her individualized education program.” So you can see where Dr. Bob was dishonestly going. In fact, he was quite explicit. He recommended that parents seek an IEP, even for “minimal speech delay or learning issue” when the child is 2 or 3 years old so that they have it later and will be “protected” from SB 277 for the entire child’s school career. This is gaming the system at its most blatant.

Naturally, the other option is a medical exemption. Dr. Bob, as did Dr. Jay before him, characterized whether or not a medical exemption is granted as being “completely up to the opinion of the doctor,” which unfortunately is basically true. This led him to recommend “seeking out open-minded doctors,” doctors who, apparently, agree with his non-evidence-based reasons for not vaccinating, including:

  • Prior vaccine reaction in child, sibling, parent, or more distant relative (protected by mention of “family history” in SB277)
  • Family history of autoimmune disease. He added: “And everyone has autoimmune disease in their family.” (Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, know what I mean, say no more!) The audience laughed appreciatively. He went on: “So an openminded doctor could use a family history of vitiligo, celiac disease, autoimmune thyroid disease, or other disease on to support a medical exemption.”
  • Autism, learning disorders, and ADHD
  • Allergies, esp if more severe
  • Other chronic conditions

Of course, none of these are evidence-based reasons except for a personal prior severe reaction to a previous vaccine or a severe allergy to a vaccine component (which would only be valid as a reason not to use that vaccine). Such reactions or allergies in family members don’t count, although unfortunately “family history” was placed into the law as a potential reason to grant a medical exemption. Given that Dr. Bob appears poised and ready to start passing out medical exemptions like candy, it’s not surprising that he mentioned the state medical board; it’s also one part of his message that’s not in his Facebook post on the subject. In brief, he told the audience that he had spoken to someone at the California Board of Medicine and been told that to date “they have not investigated any doctor for writing medical exemptions.” He stated they could, but to get involved they would need someone to file a complaint about a specific case. Yes, clearly Dr. Bob has thought about this issue and made preparations to cover his posterior, to the point where he apparently believes that if the board investigates, “nobody would get into trouble, they would just void the exemption.” Personally, I wouldn’t be so sure of that, but apparently Dr. Bob is sure enough to be telling parents this, even adding, “There might be people out to get me, but not the Medical Board.”

Not yet, perhaps. Here’s hoping that can be changed.

Next up, Dr. Bob talked strategy, asking that audience members not try to get a medical exemption if they have other options. Indeed, he even asked them to “save those for the people who are not grandfathered in; wait until your 3rd grader is about to be a 7th grader before seeking an exemption.” What he meant by this is as follows. Under SB 277, exemptions are good until certain “checkpoint” years, which typically occur when a child first enrolls in a new school (no matter what age), when a child reaches kindergarten, and when a child reaches 7th grade. Any child who already has an exemption (medical or PBE) at the beginning of the 2016-2017 school year will be able to keep that exemption until the next “checkpoint” year. So if a parent gets a PBE for her child entering kindergarten in 2016, that exemption would be good until the child reaches seventh grade or moves to another school. He also discussed taking advantage of “conditional entry” in order to spread vaccines out over years. “Conditional entry” means that a child who hasn’t met all the vaccine requirements can still be enrolled as long as there is a plan to eventually complete required vaccinations, which usually requires a note from a doctor outlining the plan. Dr. Bob actually advised dragging this process our over months or even years, only getting vaccines when the school absolutely insists on it, and hoping the school is too busy to call, saying, “You might not get by with this in a regular public school, so try charters and small private schools—seek those schools out.” To be honest, I’m not sure about that; I’d guess it might be easier to get lost in the shuffle of bureaucracy in a large public school and thus drag things out.

After Dr. Bob’s talk people lined up to ask him questions, may of which were a about whether condition X would allow him to grant a medical exemption. My reader reported that he said yes to several, including conditions like celiac disease in a relative, vague “neurodevelopmental issue” in a sibling, having a “grandfather who got diabetes after the pneumonia shot” (my jaw dropped when I read this one in the account), a mother with vitiligo (ditto), and other equally ridiculous reasons. He only hesitated once, when a parent who described his daughter getting “recurrent mouth ulcers” after a vaccine. For this one he said he’d have to discuss it in further detail at an office visit.

Of course he would.

After the main meeting broke up, there was a smaller group of parents still asking Dr. Bob questions, his answers to some of which were overheard. For instance, he was asked how much an office visit costs (his answer: $180) and whether he took insurance (his answer: no, other than TriCare). At one point, a woman approached and told Dr. Bob that her pediatrician whom she otherwise liked would not issue an exemption, asking if he would see her for a one-time visit. His response? “I would be happy to provide that service.” He also confirmed that a one-time medical exemption visit is $180 and that he’d be willing to issue such an exemption and send the child back to his primary pediatrician. When asked whether that was a conflict of interest, Dr. Bob was taken aback, reacting with genuine surprise and answering, “Do you expect me to see them for free?” According to my reader, Dr. Bob seemed genuinely not to understand the point of the question. At another time, he seemed to try to defend himself by pointing out how infectious diseases are bad, that he wrote about how bad they are in his book as well as how vaccines prevent them. When asked why he did not mention any of this to the audience, he responded, “This is about politics, I do talk about that to other audiences.”

Sure. I’ll bet he does.

Three weeks ago, I asked the question, Will SB 277 enrich antivaccine doctors? The answer is clearly yes, particularly for Dr. Bob Sears. From my perspective, he’s basically offering to sell medical exemptions to parents for $180 a pop, and he couldn’t be more blatant about what he’s doing if he tried. Indeed, I’m surprised just how closely my reader’s report aligns tightly with Dr. Bob’s advice posted on his Facebook page. The only differences were his more jocular manner and his demonstration that he’s thought about how to issue exemptions for sale without having the California Board of Medicine come after him. As far as I’m concerned, he’s become just like doctors who run prescription mills or sell prescriptions for medical marijuana. He has no honor.

Comments

  1. #1 Julian Frost
    South Africa
    August 21, 2015

    I wanted you to refute the science in the article with evidence.

    What science? Palevsky starts with a bald assertion that even on its face is dubious.

    One scientific fact is clear – the injection of a foreign protein into the body, past the body’s primary immune defense system (skin, lining of the intestines and airway), in the presence of an adjuvant like aluminum, causes the internal immune system to see that injected protein as foreign.

    Interesting then that injecting small amounts of protein into the body is a treatment for allergy.

    There are more than a dozen other bio-immune markers in our bodies that can react to the presence of injected cow milk proteins, many of which cannot and are not measurable

    Another dubious assertion. If the responses aren’t measurable, how do we know they occur.

    [Milk] and milk products are the number one food products recommended by the US government and the medical community for regular consumption by the American people.

    False. Fruits, grains and vegetables are all recommended in higher amounts than dairy.
    http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/NutritionCenter/HealthyEating/Suggested-Servings-from-Each-Food-Group_UCM_318186_Article.jsp
    Palevsky is at best wrong and at worst a liar. Using him as a source is unwise.

    Why is [Palevsky] still licensed/certified and allowed to practice?

    Because it is not illegal for a physician to reject science based medicine and embrace quackery.

    Specifications limiting allergen content in vaccines/raw materials?
    Citation?

    This comment on the last thread where you dropped your load contains links. I can’t put more than 2 links in a comment or it automatically goes into moderation.
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/05/no-the-cdc-did-not-just-apologize-and-admit-that-this-years-flu-vaccine-doesnt-work/#comment-378835

  2. #2 shay
    August 21, 2015

    Why is he still licensed/certified and allowed to practice?

    Because he has not yet been caught breaking the law. Mere quackery in this country will not get one struck off (Otherwise doctors like Wolfson and Burzynski would no longer be in business).

  3. #3 Zardoz
    Florida
    August 21, 2015

    @Eric_H

    You sir, are a cavalcade cogency. A collectanea of common sense. A wondrous wizardly wordsmithy extraordinaire. The rope-a-dope thread virtuoso of verisimilitude. Clearly a gentleman and scholar. Yeah man, you’re like groovy and all that, know what I mean, man? Just the bees-knees. And last, but not least, a swell guy with statistical confidence Cool & Hip interval range rating of 95.9% ±4. And so on and so forth etc etc etc…ad infinitum.

    I agree. Yes, of course you’re correct. You are the lone voice of reason and critical thinking in a waste land of willful-servitude, statis sycophantic lotus eaters and governmental boot-lickers. Just the concept of forced medication under coercion and threat is the direct antithesis and diametric opposite from the core structure on which the foundation of the U.S.A. was founded upon.

    I only wished I had known this mindless behavior was so virulent *ta da dump…ting* in Cali prior to SB277 being passed or I would have invested head deep in Kool-Aide™. All in, baby! But maybe it’s not too late for the mercury market *queue laughter*. I heard on the down-low, the sly that is, that this little thing called alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase or whatever, is hot, muy caliente, and a sure thing now. Now that SB277 has passed that is *wink wink nudge nudge*. Muah ha ha ha ha!

    In closing, yes, I agree “my body my choice”. A concise, intrinsically important, and inalienable statement that(should) sums up the position of a rational mind. Whereas the absence only leaves us a slippery-slop of egregious individual and civil rights violations.

    I have thoroughly enjoy your rapier wit and repartee, an opinion ,I am certain, that would elicit cavalcade of poo-pooing ghastliness from the Borg Collective, but privately admiring you from their secret special last bastion of reality and non right- think mental closet. Never give up. Hope just might exist after all. Just keep thinking, the glass really is half-full.

    Regards,
    Zardoz

  4. #4 Roger Kulp
    August 21, 2015

    Palevsky is a germ theory denialist who blames infections on “toxins”.

    The Mercola piece is worth a read,for a glimpse inside the thinking of an antivax doctor.In it,Palevsky cites the usual antivaccine tropes about the reasons kids die from diseases like measles is poor diet,poor sanitation,as well as how these diseases build immunity and character.

  5. #5 Eric H
    August 21, 2015

    Wow that was a deep analysis… “it’s a Youtube Video”… therefore…

    Followed by the admonishment about repeated warnings that “youtube” videos are “not allowed”?

    Well anyway… didn’t think you’d have anything to say about the false placebos in the studies referenced. But if you change your mind, I’d not mind hearing you out.

  6. #6 Chris
    August 21, 2015

    Eric H, your illiteracy is just astounding.

  7. #7 shay
    August 21, 2015

    Eric — as you have been told many times since you first started posting on July 22nd, science requires a certain level of proof. This can’t be met by videos because anybody can make a video. YouTube has no requirement that the video creator substantiate anything

    So go ahead and post all the videos you like, but the fact remains that it’s been a month, and you still haven’t been able to come up with any corroboration for your opinions.

  8. #8 AdamG
    August 21, 2015

    didn’t think you’d have anything to say about the false placebos in the studies referenced.

    Please do let us know when you actually reference a study.

  9. #9 shay
    August 21, 2015

    And we have proof all around us – the food allergy epidemic.

    Not quite, Sherlock.

    “In the largest study in children and adolescents so far none of the often anticipated health differences—such as allergies and the number of infections—were observed in vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects aged 1–17 years.”

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057555/

  10. #11 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 22, 2015

    Julian Frost #1606,

    “Interesting then that injecting small amounts of protein into the body is a treatment for allergy.”

    Just because you can use a thorn to remove a thorn does not make it healthy to go around pricking yourself with a thorn.

    My understanding is that such allergy therapy decreases IgE while increasing IgG. While the lower IgE provides short term relief. The long term effect of higher IgG is not known. We are still tinkering with the immune system with very little knowledge.

    Specifications:
    “http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/05/no-the-cdc-did-not-just-apologize-and-admit-that-this-years-flu-vaccine-doesnt-work/#comment-378835”
    Nice try but I already responded that those links were useless.
    They have nothing to do with ALLERGEN CONTENT IN VACCINES, which is what I am talking about.

    What does cGMP cover? Factory workers washing hands after using the restroom? I am asking for specifications NOT guidelines.

    If there was a spec. why is it not referred on the Polysorbate 80 data sheet? The Kattan et. al paper on DTaP, milk allergy does not say the casein content violated an FDA spec.
    The Japanese studies and the FDA/CDC studies of gelatin allergy do not mention a gelatin spec. Why no reference to a spec. in vaccine package inserts for say ovalbumin content?

    So admit it, a spec. does NOT EXIST no matter how hard you try to torture the truth.

    “Because it is not illegal for a physician to reject science based medicine and embrace quackery.”
    That describes Dr.Pan.

  11. #12 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 22, 2015

    shay #1614,

    The KiGGS study did not cover food allergy and is therefore irrelevant to our discussion.
    “atopic disorders (allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, atopic eczema, bronchial asthma)”

  12. #13 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 22, 2015

    Roger Kulp #1615,

    Vaccines are effective. They are not safe. Avoiding vaccines is not the solution. Fixing safety problems is the solution.

  13. #14 Politicalguineapig
    August 22, 2015

    ScienceMom; In answer to a question from way back when, I don’t want kids to die. I’m just sick of all the whining. here’s the thing: commodities need to have some value attached to them. Vaccines have no value attached to them right now aside from public health, which can’t actually be marketed. If we artificially limit the supply in some areas, like say Marin, and add perks (parties for parents and kids, shorter wait times and toys available for vaccine compliant families), vaccines will acquire value among those whiny, burby, silicon valley types.
    Aside from that, I’m also against waste. Right now, vaccines and pediatricians are wasted on Marin and Orange County. Better to relocate them to areas where they’ll do some good.

  14. #15 shay
    August 22, 2015

    APV, read the ‘key messages’ at the end.

  15. #16 Julian
    South Africa
    August 22, 2015

    APV

    Just because you can use a thorn to remove a thorn does not make it healthy to go around pricking yourself with a thorn.

    Nice use of non-sequitur there.

    Nice try but I already responded that those links were useless. They have nothing to do with ALLERGEN CONTENT IN VACCINES, which is what I am talking about.

    Ok then, let’s reread them comment. I’ve extracted and highlighted the relevant parts. Firstly, the drug substance, which refers to the active ingredient.

    Drug substance:A full description of the drug substance including its physical and chemical characteristics and stability; (snip) the method of synthesis (or isolation) and purification of the drug substance; the process controls used during manufacture and packaging; and the specifications necessary to ensure the identity, strength, quality, and purity of the drug substance…including, for example, tests, analytical procedures, and acceptance criteria relating to stability, sterility, particle size, and crystalline form.

    “Specifications necessary to insure … purity … including … acceptance criteria”.
    And now for the finished Drug product

    Drug product. A list of all components used in the manufacture of the drug product (regardless of whether they appear in the drug product) and a statement of the composition of the drug product; the specifications for each component; a description of the manufacturing and packaging procedures and in-process controls for the drug product; the specifications necessary to ensure the identity, strength, quality, purity, potency, and bioavailability of the drug product, including, for example, tests, analytical procedures, and acceptance criteria relating to sterility

    “specifications necessary to ensure the … quailty [and] purity, … including … acceptance criteria.”

    So admit it, a spec. does NOT EXIST

    I’m a software test analyst. My job is to test that newly developed software and new software versions do what theyre supposed to do. I’ve read specifications. If you don’t realise that the above comments are talking about specifications for acceptable levels of contaminants (and thus allergens), I can’t help you.

    If there was a spec. why is it not referred on the Polysorbate 80 data sheet?

    Because that’s for public consumption. Rest assured, there would be a specification and the FDA would be given a copy.

    The Kattan et. al paper on DTaP, milk allergy does not say the casein content violated an FDA spec.

    Would they need to reference one? No. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.

  16. #17 Julian
    South Africa
    August 22, 2015

    APV

    Just because you can use a thorn to remove a thorn does not make it healthy to go around pricking yourself with a thorn.

    Nice use of non-sequitur there.

    Nice try but I already responded that those links were useless. They have nothing to do with ALLERGEN CONTENT IN VACCINES, which is what I am talking about.

    Ok then, let’s reread the comment. I’ve extracted and highlighted the relevant parts. Firstly, the drug substance, which refers to the active ingredient.

    Drug substance:A full description of the drug substance including its physical and chemical characteristics and stability; (snip) the method of synthesis (or isolation) and purification of the drug substance; the process controls used during manufacture and packaging; and the specifications necessary to ensure the identity, strength, quality, and purity of the drug substance…including, for example, tests, analytical procedures, and acceptance criteria relating to stability, sterility, particle size, and crystalline form.

    “Specifications necessary to insure … purity … including … acceptance criteria”.
    And now for the finished Drug product

    Drug product. A list of all components used in the manufacture of the drug product (regardless of whether they appear in the drug product) and a statement of the composition of the drug product; the specifications for each component; a description of the manufacturing and packaging procedures and in-process controls for the drug product; the specifications necessary to ensure the identity, strength, quality, purity, potency, and bioavailability of the drug product, including, for example, tests, analytical procedures, and acceptance criteria relating to sterility

    “specifications necessary to ensure the … quality [and] purity, … including … acceptance criteria.”

    So admit it, a spec. does NOT EXIST

    I’m a software test analyst. My job is to test that newly developed software and new software versions do what theyre supposed to do. I’ve read specifications. If you don’t realise that the above comments include specifications for acceptable levels of contaminants (and thus allergens), I can’t help you.

    If there was a spec. why is it not referred on the Polysorbate 80 data sheet?

    Because that’s for public consumption. Rest assured, there would be a specification and the FDA would be given a copy.

    The Kattan et. al paper on DTaP, milk allergy does not say the casein content violated an FDA spec.

    Would they need to reference one? No. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.

  17. #18 Julian Frost
    Gauteng East Rand
    August 22, 2015

    Orac, I somehow managed to double comment and it’s been placed in moderation.

  18. #19 OccamsLaser
    August 22, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    Let’s review some of your lies.

    You claimed to be a medical student. You lied about that.

    You stated that EMD Millipore’s Polysorbate 80 has wheat and maize in it, and you cited their allergen sheet as your proof for that claim. However, that allergen sheet says that it does NOT contain wheat or maize. So you lied about that.

    You have stated that Avantor’s Polysorbate 80 was made from peanuts. You lied about that. You also stated that Avantor will not say whether that product was made with peanuts prior to 2011. You’re lying.

    You’ve stated that it is a fact that there is virtually no food allergy found among unvaccinated children, but the rate of food allergies has reached epidemic levels among vaccinated children. But you are unable to provide citations to the studies you found that made this finding. You’re lying.

    You stated that you found a document from the CDC that stated that there were vegetable oil proteins in vaccines. But when you produced the document, it turned out you fabricated your claim — the document did not contain the statement you said it did. Yet again, you lied.

    You said that the maximum safe dose of Hep B vaccine for a 130 lb 19 year old is 0.5 ml. You then denied saying that. So you lied twice.

    Please explain why you believe you, Vinu Arumugham, have any credibility.

    Someone who claims to be a doctor, but really isn’t, is a quack (one of the many forms).

    What do you call someone who claims to be a medical student, but really isn’t? A quacklet?

    Are you a medical student?

  19. #20 shay
    August 22, 2015

    What do you call someone who claims to be a medical student, but really isn’t?

    In British military circles I believe he’s what’s called a “walt*.”

    (*short for Walter Mitty).

  20. #21 Vicki
    August 22, 2015

    That sounds like an argument that vaccines shouldn’t be a commodity. Not everything we care about is a commodity: right now I have cleaner air than people on the other side of the Cascades, and it’s not because I’m paying for it, or doing something right, it’s because of where the wildfires are.

    Or, you can look for more ways to make them a commodity: does handing out coupons for grocery discounts make people more likely to get a flu shot, or does it just make it more likely that I’ll get my flu shot at the Safeway instead of the Rite Aid?

  21. #22 Politicalguineapig
    August 22, 2015

    Vicki:That sounds like an argument that vaccines shouldn’t be a commodity. Not everything we care about is a commodity.

    To you and me , yes, that is true. But to the yuppies of Marin and Orange County, everything they care about, from peace of mind to health to religion, can be bought and marketed. Therefore a strategy of perks and scarcity makes more sense in those areas than science does.

    While coupons are a good idea, most of the anti-vaxxers are upper middle class and own their own homes- basically, they’re rich. I can’t see that shaving a few dollars off the grocery bill would convince them to vaccinate. In urban LA, though, I could see that approach working.

  22. #23 OccamsLaser
    August 23, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You said,

    The KiGGS study did not cover food allergy and is therefore irrelevant to our discussion.
    “atopic disorders (allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, atopic eczema, bronchial asthma)”

    Another excellent example of your dishonesty in this discussion. You specifically stated that “Increasing vaccinations correlate with increasing asthma.” When a study is presented that says the opposite, suddenly the issue is “irrelevant.”

    So dishonest.

    How’s med school going?

  23. #24 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 23, 2015

    Julian #1622,

    A specification means, as it says, being SPECIFIC. What does “ensure the identity, strength, quality, purity,” mean in such broad general terms? That is NOT a specification.
    Purity requirements for dog chow are different from requirements for ice cream or injectable grade excipients.

    Here is an example of a specification with REAL NUMBERS:
    http://www.who.int/biologicals/publications/trs/areas/vaccines/influenza/recommen_influenza_vaccine_nov_2003.pdf
    “A.5.3 Haemagglutinin content
    The test for haemagglutinin antigen concentration is performed as described in section
    A.3.4.2.
    The vaccine shall contain in each human dose at least 15 mcg of haemagglutinin of each
    strain used in the preparation. ”

    “If there was a spec. why is it not referred on the Polysorbate 80 data sheet?

    Because that’s for public consumption”

    Nonsense. The general public is not buying injectable grade Polysorbate 80.

    “The Kattan et. al paper on DTaP, milk allergy does not say the casein content violated an FDA spec.

    Would they need to reference one? No.”

    You claimed it was a “bad batch”. How does a researcher decide if it was a bad batch without comparing the sample to a specification? They ABSOLUTELY needed to talk about a spec. If the vaccine met specification, then the specification is broken and needs to be updated based on their findings. If the vaccine failed spec., the vaccine maker is at fault and has to fix their process. THAT’S THE WAY SCIENCE and ENGINEERING WORK to solve problems.

    The shoddy process we have today ensures that vaccine safety will remain an oxymoron.

  24. #25 OccamsLaser
    August 23, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    First, let’s make sure you understand something: You are in no position to question the FDA’s or the CDC’s integrity or honesty, because you’re a proven liar.

    Next, let’s not forget another one of your extraordinarily serious lies: you ‘ve been telling people that it is a fact that vaccine makers produce vaccines with peanut oil proteins in them. Again, you have stated that as a fact. But it’s not a fact, as you of course know; you made it up. To scare people.

    Please present documentation from a vaccine or vaccine ingredient maker, or from a laboratory that has conducted an analysis, stating that vaccines have peanut oil proteins in them.

    If you cannot, then stop lying about it.

  25. #26 Julian Frost
    South Africa
    August 23, 2015

    APV:

    A specification means, as it says, being SPECIFIC.

    Actually, the meaning is “name explicitly”.

    What does “ensure the identity, strength, quality, purity,” mean in such broad general terms? That is NOT a specification

    Another total non-sequitur. Did you miss the word “specification” that appeared throughout my comment? For instance, “Specifications necessary to insure … purity”. They are saying that there have to be specifications for those things. To then complain that that comment is not itself a specification is disingenuous.

    If there was a spec. why is it not referred on the Polysorbate 80 data sheet?

    Because that’s for public consumption”

    Nonsense. The general public is not buying injectable grade Polysorbate 80.

    The DATASHEET is what’s for public consumption.
    You are coming across as specious, APV.

  26. #27 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 23, 2015

    Julian Frost #1631,

    From Sanofi Pasteur:
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/05/no-the-cdc-did-not-just-apologize-and-admit-that-this-years-flu-vaccine-doesnt-work/#comment-378835
    “There is no specification for residual egg protein (expressed as ovalbumin) for influenza vaccines in the United States, nor is testing of the final product required for ovalbumin content.”

    Can you explain that?

    The injectable grade Polysorbate 80 datasheet is for pharmaceutical companies that use that product. Not for the general public.

  27. #28 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 23, 2015

    OccamsLaser #1630,

    According to you, all food proteins in vaccines are safe. So why should people be scared about peanut proteins in vaccines?
    The CDC/FDA have documented that vaccines are contaminated with egg, milk, soy etc. There’s plenty for people to be scared about EVEN WITHOUT peanut.

    These are the facts and they are undisputed:
    1. Vaccines are contaminated with numerous food proteins.
    2. There is no safe dosage established and no regulation controlling the amount of food proteins in vaccines.
    3. Vegetable oil is a raw material in the manufacture of Polysorbate 80.
    4. There is NO regulation outlawing the use of peanut oil as a raw material for Polysorbate 80.

    Avantor’s datasheet and current marketing practices strongly suggest that they have used peanut as a raw material for their Polysorbate 80 in the past.

  28. #29 OccamsLaser
    August 23, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You’re a liar.

    You don’t even deny that you’ve lied. Are you proud of being a dishonest person? Do you teach your children that they should lie to get what they want?

    Here’s your latest lie:

    OccamsLaser #1630,

    According to you, all food proteins in vaccines are safe.

    Please produce the exact quotation of mine to which you refer. Your inevitable failure to do so proves that you are lying yet again. You have absolutely no integrity whatsoever,

    You say,

    The CDC/FDA have documented that vaccines are contaminated with egg, milk, soy etc. There’s plenty for people to be scared about EVEN WITHOUT peanut.

    Oh, but you specifically said that vaccine makers produce vaccines with peanut oil proteins in them, and you specifically said that a CDC document you cited stated that there were vegetable oil proteins in vaccines. You lied about both of those things in an attempt to scare people. To terrify them. Do you know a word for a person who tries to terrify others to get what he wants?

    You said,

    These are the facts and they are undisputed:
    1. Vaccines are contaminated with numerous food proteins.

    Coward.

    Stand behind your words. You said that vaccine makers produce vaccines with peanut oil proteins in them. Are you running away from your statement? Are you admitting that you lied about that?

    You said,

    Avantor’s datasheet and current marketing practices strongly suggest that they have used peanut as a raw material for their Polysorbate 80 in the past.

    You’re lying. Avantor never used peanuts as a raw material for their Polysorbate 80, nor have they ever suggested that they have. You have not, and cannot, produce a shred of evidence to the contrary, because you fabricated this claim. You’re trying to terrify people by lying. How disgusting.

    Why won’t you have some courage and address the question about whether you are a medical student or not, as you claimed to be in correspondence with a doctor?

    Is it because you’re a coward?

    Don’t forget that one day, your children will read this. And they will have the same questions for you.

  29. #30 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 23, 2015

    OccamsLaser #1634,

    “Avantor never used peanuts as a raw material for their Polysorbate 80,”

    Then why did they LEAVE OUT peanut (a major, common allergen) WHILE INCLUDING several other allergens in their “do not contain” list.

  30. #31 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 24, 2015

    OccamsLaser #1628,

    Here we are talking about food allergy. So the study is irrelevant.

    If you want to talk about asthma, the KiGGs study shows that there were ZERO asthma cases in 1-5 year unvaccinated group (n=44).
    There was 1.8% asthma in 1-5 year vaccinated group (n=3886).

    Assume asthma was caused ONLY by NON-VACCINE causes.
    The prevalence rate is 1.8%. Probability that a child will not develop asthma is 0.982.
    What’s the probability of the observed outcome (0/44 in the unvaccinated group)?
    0.982^44=0.45. So there’s a 45% chance that this outcome is explained by NON-VACCINE asthma causes. 55% chance the outcome is explained by VACCINES CAUSING ASTHMA.

    You won’t find that in the results of the study.

    Another study showing ZERO asthma in an unvaccinated group.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9345669

  31. #32 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 24, 2015

    shay #1620,

    If they did not study food allergy, they cannot conclude anything about food allergy in the “key message” section.

  32. #33 OccamsLaser
    August 24, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You are a gutless coward.

    You won’t stand behind your own words.

    Go ahead. Let’s see if you have any courage. State that Avantor is lying when they state that they have never used peanuts to make their Polysorbate 80.

    I dare you.

    But you won’t say it, because you’re a lying coward.

    And you’re still running away from your words, because you’re dishonest, and you know it.

    You said that vaccine makers produce vaccines with peanut oil proteins in them. That was a lie, and you’re running away from your assertion.

    You cited a CDC document that, you claimed, listed vegetable oil proteins as being in vaccines. That was a lie, and you’re fleeing from your words, because you know it was a lie.

    You said that you were a medical student. You represented yourself as one in a conversation with a doctor. Disgusting. And you have such a total lack of personal integrity that you won’t even address this lie of yours.

    Do you have the guts to directly accuse Avantor of covering up the fact that they used peanuts to make their Polysorbate 80?

    We all know the answer.

  33. #34 OccamsLaser
    August 24, 2015

    Anatomy of a Vinu Arumugham (APV) lie:

    – He reads a datasheet for a vaccine ingredient that says maize and wheat “are not present in the final
    product.”

    – This does not fit with what he hoped the datasheet said, so he decides to lie about what’s in the datasheet

    – He declares that the product datasheet says it does contain maize and wheat

    – As proof of his claim, he gives a reference to the datasheet, and hopes that no one makes the effort to actually pull the sheet and read it

    – His lie is discovered and the proof is presented

    – He quickly moves on to another lie and evades all questions about his fabrication

    A simple approach, repeated over and over. His lack of integrity is sickening.

  34. #35 OccamsLaser
    August 24, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV) wrote,

    Assume asthma was caused ONLY by NON-VACCINE causes.
    The prevalence rate is 1.8%. Probability that a child will not develop asthma is 0.982.
    What’s the probability of the observed outcome (0/44 in the unvaccinated group)?
    0.982^44=0.45. So there’s a 45% chance that this outcome is explained by NON-VACCINE asthma causes. 55% chance the outcome is explained by VACCINES CAUSING ASTHMA.

    Assume flipped coins coming up heads was caused ONLY by NON-VACCINE causes.

    The prevalence rate is 50%. Probability that a child will not flip heads is 0.5.

    A group of 5 unvaccinated kids each flips one coin, and they all come up tails.

    What’s the probability of the observed outcome (0/5 in the unvaccinated group)?

    0.5^5=0.03125. So there’s a 3.1% chance that this outcome is explained by NON-VACCINE causes. 96.9% chance the outcome is explained by VACCINES CAUSING COINS TO COME UP HEADS.

  35. #36 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 24, 2015

    OccamsLaser #1639,

    I already responded to that in the previous thread. You conveniently ignore it.

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/05/no-the-cdc-did-not-just-apologize-and-admit-that-this-years-flu-vaccine-doesnt-work/#comment-378761

    APV

    December 26, 2014
    OccamsLaser #846,

    And, you left out what it says after that:

    “The following materials are used as raw material but are not present in the final
    product: Maize, Wheat
    We point out that we do not perform any testing on allergens in the above-mentioned
    product.”
    Just like the FDA. They don’t test it for safety but they know it’s safe.

  36. #37 Julian Frost
    Gauteng East Rand
    August 24, 2015

    APV:
    1) You linked to the wrong comment.
    2) You are now referring to influenza vaccine, not DTaP. Did you really think I wouldn’t notice the attempted misdirection?
    3) You left out that they had subjected the vaccines to tests, and that these tests found under half a microgram of ovalbumin.
    If the manufacturing processes are so good that such little amounts of a substance remain, then a specification would likely be unnecessary and a waste of time. That doesn’t mean that a more general specification doesn’t exist, nor does it mean that testing never happens.
    W.R.T. your claims about peanut oil being used to manufacture polysorbate 80, I did some reading. Polysorbate 80 is made from oleic acid. Canola oil is both far richer in oleic acid than peanut oil and cheaper.
    Simple economics blows your accusation out of the water.

  37. #38 OccamsLaser
    August 24, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You claim,

    OccamsLaser #1639,

    I already responded to that in the previous thread. You conveniently ignore it.

    You’re lying. You never responded to the fact that your claim that Millipore’s allergen sheet stated that the product contained wheat and maize was a lie, fabricated by you.

    Would you like to respond to that now?

    Let’s review.

    You stated as fact that the allergen sheet says that the Polysorbate 80 has maize and wheat in it.

    The allergen sheet does not say that; you made it up. You lied.

    Here’s your chance to retract your fabrication about what the allergen sheet says.

    Are you a medical student?

  38. #39 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 24, 2015

    Julian Frost #1642,

    “2) You are now referring to influenza vaccine, not DTaP.”

    We are talking about food allergens in ANY vaccine.
    What are you complaining about?

    “3) You left out that they had subjected the vaccines to tests, and that these tests found under half a microgram of ovalbumin.
    If the manufacturing processes are so good that such little amounts of a substance remain, then a specification would likely be unnecessary and a waste of time. That doesn’t mean that a more general specification doesn’t exist, nor does it mean that testing never happens.”

    Provide us the citation showing “under half a microgram of ovalbumin” is safe.

    “W.R.T. your claims about peanut oil being used to manufacture polysorbate 80, I did some reading. Polysorbate 80 is made from oleic acid. Canola oil is both far richer in oleic acid than peanut oil and cheaper.
    Simple economics blows your accusation out of the water.”

    Avantor uses corn, palm, coconut, sunflower and NOT canola.
    So there’s more to it than the cheapest oleic acid you can find. EMD Millipore uses Maize and wheat as sources. Your simple economics is well, too simplistic.

  39. #40 OccamsLaser
    August 24, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You said that Avantor “changed the product (from peanut origin to other sources).”

    Do you stand by this accusation, or are you retracting it? Avantor will be interested.

    Are you a coward? Are you a medical student?

  40. #41 Julian Frost
    Gauteng East Rand
    August 24, 2015

    Avantor uses corn, palm, coconut, sunflower and NOT canola.

    The corn oil is used for sorbitol. Sunflower oil is also cheaper than peanut oil and in the high oleic varieties, up to 85% oleic acid. Palm oil is 37% oleic acid and again, cheaper than peanut oil. Coconut oil is processed to reduce rancidification, which produces oleic acid as a byproduct that would otherwise go to waste.
    The economic argument stands.
    https://www.aaaai.org/Aaaai/media/MediaLibrary/PDF%20Documents/Practice%20and%20Parameters/Egg-Allergy-and-Influenza-Vaccine-112111.pdf

    When influenza vaccine skin testing was done in egg-allergic patients, subjects with positive skin test results had no reactions, or no greater rate of reactions, than those with negative
    skin test results.

  41. #42 Richard Smith
    August 24, 2015

    You know, I’ve never seen a coffee shop with a sign that clearly states that nobody pees in the coffee. Applying APV’s rules of omission, does that mean that there’s a lot of extra-bitter coffee out there?

  42. #43 Gray Falcon
    August 24, 2015

    APV, do you understand why you need to be honest?

  43. #44 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 25, 2015

    Richard Smith #1647,

    No you don’t understand the problem correctly.
    Avantor and EMD Millipore are saying that their Polysorbate 80 is sourced from maize, wheat, corn, safflower, coconut and palm. They are claiming that there is no residual maize, wheat, corn, safflower, coconut and palm in the final product, WITHOUT performing any testing.

    So here is the equivalent:
    The coffee shop make coffee WITH PEE.
    Then claims there is no residual pee in the coffee and they don’t test for the presence of pee in the coffee.

    Now how does that sound?

  44. #45 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 25, 2015

    OccamsLaser #1645,

    “changed the product (from peanut origin to other sources).”

    According to their datasheet and marketing material, that is exactly what they did and I stand by it.

  45. #46 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 25, 2015

    Julian Frost #1646,

    “When influenza vaccine skin testing was done in egg-allergic patients,”

    That’s elicitation. We are talking about sensitization. Pl. provide reference demonstrating safety w.r.t sensitization. As we have discussed, it takes less allergen to sensitize than to elicit a reaction.

    While focusing on peanut in Polysorbate 80, you are missing another point. Even if they are not currently making our kids sick with peanut, they are continuing to make them sick with maize, wheat, corn, palm, sunflower and coconut proteins in their injectable grade excipients.

    Would it make you any happier if your child has a life-threatening allergy to corn instead of peanut?

  46. #47 OccamsLaser
    August 25, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You say,

    OccamsLaser #1645,

    “changed the product (from peanut origin to other sources).”

    According to their datasheet and marketing material, that is exactly what they did and I stand by it.

    You’re lying.

    Provide the exact quote from the datasheet that states that the product used to be of peanut origin. Not the statement that they added peanuts to the listing on the sheet of allergens not present that has caused you to guess that the product had previously contained peanuts — that’s your own inference, and your own alone, and it’s wrong.

    So, let’s be perfectly clear about this: You are now claiming that the datasheet states that the product had previously been made from peanuts. Provide the exact quote from the datasheet that makes this statement.

    Don’t evade and continue to dance around. Give the quote. Not your speculation, not your inference.

    You’re telling everyone who reads your posts that Avantor’s datasheet states that their Polysorbate 80 used to be made from peanuts. I’m calling you on your lie.

    Provide the proof: quote the datasheet.

    Avantor states that the product was never made from peanuts. If you have the guts — which I say you don’t — make a direct statement accusing them of lying and covering up the fact that they used to make the product from peanuts.

    I say you’re too much of a coward to make that direct accusation.

    Let’s find out.

  47. #48 Julian Frost
    Gauteng East Rand
    August 25, 2015

    Nice goalpost shift there, APV.

    Even if they are not currently making our kids sick with peanut, they are continuing to make them sick with maize, wheat, corn, palm, sunflower and coconut proteins in their injectable grade excipients.

    Evidence needed.
    In fact, I’ve decided to stop engaging you. As Occamslaser has made clear, you lied. You took the fact that Avantor’s datasheet on polysorbate 80 had peanuts added to the excluded items list as proof that it was previously made from peanuts. You have continued to insist that it was, even after evidence refuting you was given. In #1650 you wrote:

    According to their datasheet and marketing material, that is exactly what they did and I stand by it.

    even though you can’t point to proof that it was.

  48. #49 Roger Kulp
    August 25, 2015

    @Gray Falcon
    August 24, 2015

    “APV, do you understand why you need to be honest?”

    Simple answer.No. he does not.

  49. #50 Richard Smith
    August 25, 2015

    @APV (#1649):

    Okay, so coffee made on the International Space Station, then.

  50. #51 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 25, 2015

    OccamsLaser #1652,
    “Avantor states that the product was never made from peanuts.”

    Reference?

  51. #52 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 25, 2015

    Julian Frost #1653,

    “You took the fact that Avantor’s datasheet on polysorbate 80 had peanuts added to the excluded items list as proof that it was previously made from peanuts.”

    Exactly. You have refused to answer a simple question. Why did a common, major allergen such as peanut go missing when other allergens are listed?
    In science and engineering, a data sheet is EVERYTHING. You don’t make guesses. If peanut is not in the excluded list, YOU HAVE TO ASSUME IT COULD HAVE PEANUTS. You could get someone killed by making assumptions.

  52. #53 gaist
    August 25, 2015

    And you have to acknowledge “YOU HAVE TO ASSUME IT COULD HAVE PEANUTS” is not the same as proven.

  53. #54 Roger Kulp
    August 25, 2015

    I’ll toss this out for Vinu/APV to chew on.Lots of linky goodness at original blog post.Including a link to Vinu’s pals at VacTruth.Basically Federal laws prohibit vaccine makers from “sneaking” peanut oil,or other “hidden” ingredients into vaccines.According to studies mentioned here,the myth peanut oil here is in vaccines goes back to investigational studies in the early 1960s into the provisional use of peanut oil as an adjuvant for vaccines.The idea was abandoned.

    Next we have some actual scientists ripping Vinu’s claims to pieces.Enjoy.

  54. #55 shay
    August 25, 2015

    You could get someone killed by making assumptions.

    And yet…that’s all you do.

  55. #56 OccamsLaser
    August 25, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You write,

    Julian Frost #1653,

    “You took the fact that Avantor’s datasheet on polysorbate 80 had peanuts added to the excluded items list as proof that it was previously made from peanuts.”

    Exactly. You have refused to answer a simple question. Why did a common, major allergen such as peanut go missing when other allergens are listed?
    In science and engineering, a data sheet is EVERYTHING. You don’t make guesses. If peanut is not in the excluded list, YOU HAVE TO ASSUME IT COULD HAVE PEANUTS.

    So, Vinu, which is it?

    Are you claiming that it is a fact that it has peanuts, or is it an assumption that you are making?

    Don’t be evasive.

    Give a direct answer.

    If you have the guts.

  56. #57 OccamsLaser
    August 26, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You write,

    OccamsLaser #1652,
    “Avantor states that the product was never made from peanuts.”

    Reference?

    Avantor.

    I mean, you did ask them, didn’t you?

    Are you claiming that it is a fact that the product was made with peanuts, or is it an assumption that you are making?

    Don’t be evasive.

    Give a direct answer.

    Are you a medical student?

  57. #58 OccamsLaser
    August 26, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You state as a fact that vaccines have peanut oil proteins in them. Not as an assumption you are making — but as a fact.

    Please produce the citation that shows that a particular vaccine contains peanut oil proteins.

  58. #59 OccamsLaser
    August 26, 2015

    Vinu arumugham (APV):

    You claimed that the datasheet for Millipore’s Polysorbate 80 states that the product contains maize and wheat. Not that those are raw materials for the product — but that the sheet states that the product has maize and wheat in it.

    Is it true that Millipore’s data sheet for their Polysorbate 80 states that the product has maize and wheat?

    This is a yes-or-no question. Do you have the courage to answer it directly, without evasion?

    I doubt it.

    Prove me wrong.

  59. #60 OccamsLaser
    August 26, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    According to you, Avantor’s Polysorbate 80 is currently being made from sesame oil and the final product contains sesame oil proteins.

    Do you have a laboratory analysis to back that up?

  60. #61 JGC
    August 26, 2015

    Then why did they LEAVE OUT peanut (a major, common allergen) WHILE INCLUDING several other allergens in their “do not contain” list.

    My daughter’s allergic to cats (also a common allergen). I note Avantor left out ‘cats’ while including several other allergens in their “do not contain” list.

    Should I be concerned that Avantor’s vaccines contain ‘cat’?

    If not, why should the omission of ‘peanuts’ from the ‘do not contain’ list concern me?

  61. #62 Richard Smith
    August 26, 2015

    I bought an apple pie the other day. I just searched the whole box, and there is nothing that tells me that the pie is cyanide free. They even helpfully mention that it was prepared and baked in a peanut-free facility; why did they LEAVE OUT cyanide (a major, universal poison)?

  62. #63 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 27, 2015

    Richard Smith #1667,

    If the next pie you buy comes with a note that says the pie is now made without cyanide, what does it tell you about the pie you bought the other day?

    BTW, E 535 or sodium ferrocyanide is a food additive used as an anti-caking agent in table salt. So you may be enjoying a cyanide laced pie …

  63. #64 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 27, 2015

    JGC #1666,

    Avantor says its Polysorbate 80 is of vegetable origin. Covers cats.

    “If not, why should the omission of ‘peanuts’ from the ‘do not contain’ list concern me?”

    It is not just the omission of peanuts. The context matters.

    Let’s look at the datasheet:
    http://askavantor.force.com/servlet/fileField?id=0BEG0000000TSTm

    Section 4 says:
    “Allergen/Hypersensitivities Information: The products listed do not contain wheat, rye,
    oats, barley, spelt, malt, triticale, gluten, other grains, soybean, eggs, yeast, canola, dairy
    products, seafood products, peanuts, natural grape products, natural flavors, artificial flavors,
    celery, lactose, sulfites, elemental sulfur, preservatives, MSG, disodium guanylate/inosinate,
    artificial sweeteners, phenylalanine, additives, colorants, dyes, or natural rubber (latex).”

    It has every major allergen (with the exception of sesame and tree nuts) and numerous less common allergens.

    Section 6 says:
    “Rev. 7; March 30, 2011 – Section 4: Added peanuts to the Allergen list; Corrected residual
    solvents info for Ethylene glycol; minor formatting. (JLW)”

    In this context, it is quite clear that Avantor was unable to guarantee that pre-2011, their products were peanut-free.
    How can they have overlooked peanut when so many lesser allergens are listed?
    Now they are unable to guarantee that it is free of sesame or tree nuts.

    The data sheet alone should make it clear that pre-2011 products could be contaminated with peanut. Now they specifically claim that their product is non-animal and non-peanut origin. Why single out peanut now? Did Avantor find out that peanut is a major allergen only in 2011?

  64. #65 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 27, 2015

    JGC #1666,

    This product lists sesame and tree nuts are also absent.
    http://askavantor.force.com/servlet/fileField?id=0BEG0000000TUGq

    So Avantor is aware of the allergenicity of sesame/tree nuts but left it out here:
    http://askavantor.force.com/servlet/fileField?id=0BEG0000000TSTm
    Again, because they are unable to guarantee that this product is free of those allergens.

  65. #66 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 27, 2015

    OccamsLaser #1664,

    Here’s what I wrote:
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/05/no-the-cdc-did-not-just-apologize-and-admit-that-this-years-flu-vaccine-doesnt-work/#comment-376994

    Get back to us when you have better English comprehension skills.

  66. #67 Julian Frost
    Gauteng East Rand
    August 27, 2015

    <blockquote.In this context, it is quite clear that Avantor was unable to guarantee that pre-2011, their products were peanut-free.
    I think I’ll start calling APV Humpty Dumpty. The fact that Avantor only added peanuts to the exclusion list does not mean that “Avantor was unable to guarantee that pre-2011, their products were peanut-free”, despite Humpty Dumpty’s blatherings.

    So Avantor is aware of the allergenicity of sesame/tree nuts but left it out here

    Sesame oil is costlier than other vegetable oils due to a worldwide shortage and the fact that it is mostly grown in developing countries, which makes automated extraction unviable. That you view the omission as proof that it was used speaks volumes.

  67. #68 gaist
    August 27, 2015

    You don’t make guesses. If peanut is not in the excluded list, YOU HAVE TO ASSUME IT COULD HAVE PEANUTS. You could get someone killed by making assumptions.

    Can you help me decipher this bit from your #1657, APV?

    These statements seems contradictory.

    Aren’t assumptions guesses too? And if they can get someone killed, why would you do it?

  68. #69 JGC
    August 27, 2015

    If the next pie you buy comes with a note that says the pie is now made without cyanide, what does it tell you about the pie you bought the other day?

    It certainly doesn’t tell you the pie you bought the other day did contain cyanide.

    Avantor says its Polysorbate 80 is of vegetable origin. Covers cats.

    Cats are ‘vegetable’–are you sure? Maybe they’re mineral (I bet you’re a lot of fun to play 20 Questions with).

    Now they are unable to guarantee that it is free of sesame or tree nuts.

    Or cats. Or dolphins. Ectoplasm. Studebakers and Edsels. Why the list of things they’re apparently ‘unable to guarantee it’s free of’ is orders of magnitude larger than the list of things they can guarantee it’s free of. Shouldn’t we be just as concerned about all of these are we are of peanuts? What if it contains napalm? There’s not guarantee it doesn’t, after all, and I think a good argument can be made that napalm is much, much more dangerous than peanuts, and able to affect many more people—after all, everyone is ‘sensitized’ against napalm.

  69. #70 JGC
    Sitting at my desk, cursing html errors
    August 27, 2015

    Sigh

  70. #71 Richard Smith
    August 27, 2015

    @APV (#1668): You know, if you’re one of those people that eats the whole apple, including the core, you’re ACTUALLY (no “may” about it) enjoying a cyanide laced apple.

    Of course, if some company decides to slap a “-FREE” label on their product, there’s no way they’re just jumping on the latest consumer fad bandwagon (or, more optimistically, addressing the latest issue of which consumers have become aware…), right? I mean, that virgin olive oil now says it’s cholesterol free; just how much cholesterol did it have before (and just what sort of GMO plant/animal monstrosity were those original olives, as you don’t usually get cholesterol from plants)? And of course, everything that now bears a “gluten-free” sticker on it was originally saturated in the stuff, right?

    So, yeah, a notification that a product is peanut-free that appeared about the time that peanut-allergy awareness was peaking can only be explained by the peanut allergens actually previously existing in the product and being removed, and not as a response to a sudden influx of questions regarding the peanut allergen content of the product.

  71. #72 MI Dawn
    August 27, 2015

    @Richard Smith: oh, DON’T get me started on food labeling. I lost all faith in the intelligence of my fellow humans when I was at the store and saw that the fruit was labeled as gluten-free. (And I have friends who HAVE celiac, so I’m very conscious about gluten foods if they will be with me for a meal).

  72. #73 Renate
    August 27, 2015

    Not to talk about cans of fish with the allergie-information: “Contains fish”.
    Well duh, I didn’t expect to be able to buy a can of fish-free fish.

  73. #74 MI Dawn
    August 27, 2015

    @Renate: yeah, like the Planter’s Peanut packages that say “Caution: Contains Peanuts”. Ya THINK?

  74. #75 OccamsLaser
    August 27, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You say,

    OccamsLaser #1664,

    Here’s what I wrote:
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/05/no-the-cdc-did-not-just-apologize-and-admit-that-this-years-flu-vaccine-doesnt-work/#comment-376994

    Get back to us when you have better English comprehension skills.

    OK, Vinu, let’s take it step by step, because you seem to have great difficulty understanding simple written English, and your ability to tell the truth, as we have seen, is deeply deficient.

    Did you, or did you not, state that Millipore’s Polysorbate 80 has maize and wheat in it, and did you or did you not offer the datasheet as your proof, even though it says the opposite?

    This is very straightforward.

    Try to be honest.

  75. #76 OccamsLaser
    August 27, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    Please don’t be a coward.

    Make a simple, direct statement that Avantor used to make their Polysorbate 80 from peanuts and they lied about that on their datasheet.

    Make a simple, direct statement that Avantor is lying now when they say they never made their Polysorbate 80 from peanuts.

    Make a simple, direct statement that Avantor currently makes their Polysorbate 80 from sesame seeds.

    Make a simple, direct statement that Avantor lies on their current datasheet by not disclosing that they make their Polysorbate 80 from sesame seeds.

    Let’s see whether you have the courage of your convictions.

    I say you don’t.

  76. #77 OccamsLaser
    August 27, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You said,

    If the next pie you buy comes with a note that says the pie is now made without cyanide, what does it tell you about the pie you bought the other day?

    Please provide your proof that Avantor states that their Polysorbate 80 product is “now made without peanuts.”

    Please note the wording, which you used in your attempt to draw a parallel to the apple pie hypothetical. Your wording — not mine, not anyone else’s. Yours.

    The burden is now on you to prove that Avantor used that wording. Please pay particular attention to the word “now” that you used in your claimed parallel.

    Any attempt to evade this simple question will reveal that you are dishonest. People evade when they are afraid of giving an honest answer.

    Are you afraid?

    I think so.

    We’ll find out shortly.

  77. #78 OccamsLaser
    August 27, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You state as a fact that vaccines have peanut oil proteins in them. Not as an assumption you are making — but as a fact.

    Please produce a citation that shows that a particular vaccine actually contains peanut oil proteins.

    You’re making this claim on the Internet, so you should be able to produce the proof (not just give your own assumption).

    The proof. Please produce it.

  78. #79 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 28, 2015

    Richard Smith #1676,

    “consumer fad bandwagon”

    Injectable grade Polysorbate 80 is sold to professionals in the pharmaceutical industry. If you are suggesting that those professionals are just as susceptible to such fad as ordinary consumers, then we may have a bigger vaccine safety problem than I have described …

  79. #80 APV
    foodallergycauses.wordpress.com
    August 29, 2015

    FOOD PROTEIN CONTAMINATED VACCINES CAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT OF FOOD ALLERGIES.

    Straight from the horse’s mouth.
    https://iom.nationalacademies.org/Reports/2011/Adverse-Effects-of-Vaccines-Evidence-and-Causality.aspx

    “Adverse events on our list thought to be due to IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions
    Antigens in the vaccines that the committee is charged with reviewing do not typically elicit an immediate hypersensitivity reaction (e.g., hepatitis B surface antigen, toxoids, gelatin, ovalbumin, casamino acids).
    However, as will be discussed in subsequent chapters, the above-mentioned antigens do occasionally induce IgE-mediated sensitization in some individuals and subsequent hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis.”

    Anybody want to argue with that?

  80. #81 OccamsLaser
    August 29, 2015

    Vinu Arumugham (APV):

    You’re evading. That’s what dishonest people do.

    Figures.

  81. #82 MI Dawn
    August 29, 2015

    I’m not answering APV here. I already answered about his abstract on the Deisher post about the book he linked to. But to reiterate the final conclusion:

    Overall, the committee concludes that few health problems are caused by or clearly associated with vaccines.

  82. #83 MI Dawn
    August 29, 2015

    P.S. APV: when will you learn that we WILL check your references and point out when you cherry pick parts?

  83. #84 shay
    August 29, 2015

    If the next pie you buy comes with a note that says the pie is now made without cyanide, what does it tell you about the pie you bought the other day?

    Some people are smart enough to realize that the pie they bought the other day never had cyanide in it to begin with.

New comments have been disabled.