Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: (Thimerosal ban) Vaccine Rule Is Said to Hurt Health Efforts [View all]proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)57. Read this carefully please.
PEDIATRICS, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published three independent editorials that state calling for removal of the mercury-based preservative thimerosal from pediatric vaccines in 1999 was hasty and erroneous. Then, in turn, the authors endorse the position of the World Health Organization (WHO) to exempt thimerosal from the United Nations Environmental Program Global Mercury Treaty currently under negotiation.
PEDIATRICS clearly states the opinions expressed are the authors and not necessarily those of the AAP or its Committees.
http://www.safeminds.org/news/renewed-call-for-phaseout.html
Stunned by Opinions Endorsing Mercury in Childhood Vaccines, SafeMinds Renews Call for Phase Out
Opinions recently published in Pediatrics advance a callous approach to the health of the worlds children. The authors rationalize using a handful of studies they hope will counter well-justified science about exposure to mercury and its known links to brain damage.
The causal link between brain damage and mercury mercury in any form, especially the organic forms including ethylmercury found in the vaccine preservative thimerosal has been well-established. Hundreds of articles on studies have been published over the past 75 years by the worlds most respected scientists whose only association is a shared goal of the scientific search for truth.
Eric Uram, SafeMinds Executive Director believes the WHO is seeking help to justify their call to keep mercury in the international vaccine supply. Obviously the World Health Organization reached out for support in continuing the use of mercury in vaccines given to infants and pregnant mothers. SafeMinds thinks this idea is scientifically and morally bankrupt and vaccine policy-makers should agree with well-established science, researchers and parents in rejecting it.
The open-ended blanket exemption for the Global Mercury Treaty, proposed by WHO and endorsed by the opinions in Pediatrics, would provide companies with no incentives to change the status quo and could reverse efforts to eliminate mercury exposures. This endangers the welfare of children by perpetuating mercury in pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) including vaccines in developing countries and opens the potential to the return of mercury preservatives into products, even those where it had already been removed, including US domestic infant and children vaccines.
SafeMinds believes going against the definitive scientific evidence on mercury toxicity would be unprecedented in public health policy. Frankly, the opinions found in the editorials are not only incorrect; they are irrelevant to an evidence-based vaccine policy. The fact is the science clearly shows all forms of mercury, including thimerosal, are known to affect the brain and are poison to the human body, said Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN, and Vice-President of SafeMinds.
SafeMinds supports the timely global phase-out of thimerosal from all PPCPs, including vaccines. Technology to provide all children in the world with the safest vaccines possible has a price difference estimated by WHO at about $4 per child and would be more than offset by reduced costs to treat mercury-impacted children and provide a healthier and more productive future workforce.
PEDIATRICS, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published three independent editorials that state calling for removal of the mercury-based preservative thimerosal from pediatric vaccines in 1999 was hasty and erroneous. Then, in turn, the authors endorse the position of the World Health Organization (WHO) to exempt thimerosal from the United Nations Environmental Program Global Mercury Treaty currently under negotiation.
PEDIATRICS clearly states the opinions expressed are the authors and not necessarily those of the AAP or its Committees.
According to Uram, "Decisions affecting millions of children globally should not be based on opinions but on sound science. Todays science clearly shows that all mercury exposure is dangerous, especially for children. Mercury is more toxic than lead, and considered the second most toxic element on Earth after plutonium. Justifying injecting it into humans turns science-based policy to protect public health right on its head."
Download science summary highlighting studies that support removal of thimerosal (updated December 2012):
http://www.safeminds.org/research/docs/Thimerosal%20Science%20Summary%20Dec%202012.pdf
Stunned by Opinions Endorsing Mercury in Childhood Vaccines, SafeMinds Renews Call for Phase Out
Opinions recently published in Pediatrics advance a callous approach to the health of the worlds children. The authors rationalize using a handful of studies they hope will counter well-justified science about exposure to mercury and its known links to brain damage.
The causal link between brain damage and mercury mercury in any form, especially the organic forms including ethylmercury found in the vaccine preservative thimerosal has been well-established. Hundreds of articles on studies have been published over the past 75 years by the worlds most respected scientists whose only association is a shared goal of the scientific search for truth.
Eric Uram, SafeMinds Executive Director believes the WHO is seeking help to justify their call to keep mercury in the international vaccine supply. Obviously the World Health Organization reached out for support in continuing the use of mercury in vaccines given to infants and pregnant mothers. SafeMinds thinks this idea is scientifically and morally bankrupt and vaccine policy-makers should agree with well-established science, researchers and parents in rejecting it.
The open-ended blanket exemption for the Global Mercury Treaty, proposed by WHO and endorsed by the opinions in Pediatrics, would provide companies with no incentives to change the status quo and could reverse efforts to eliminate mercury exposures. This endangers the welfare of children by perpetuating mercury in pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) including vaccines in developing countries and opens the potential to the return of mercury preservatives into products, even those where it had already been removed, including US domestic infant and children vaccines.
SafeMinds believes going against the definitive scientific evidence on mercury toxicity would be unprecedented in public health policy. Frankly, the opinions found in the editorials are not only incorrect; they are irrelevant to an evidence-based vaccine policy. The fact is the science clearly shows all forms of mercury, including thimerosal, are known to affect the brain and are poison to the human body, said Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN, and Vice-President of SafeMinds.
SafeMinds supports the timely global phase-out of thimerosal from all PPCPs, including vaccines. Technology to provide all children in the world with the safest vaccines possible has a price difference estimated by WHO at about $4 per child and would be more than offset by reduced costs to treat mercury-impacted children and provide a healthier and more productive future workforce.
PEDIATRICS, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published three independent editorials that state calling for removal of the mercury-based preservative thimerosal from pediatric vaccines in 1999 was hasty and erroneous. Then, in turn, the authors endorse the position of the World Health Organization (WHO) to exempt thimerosal from the United Nations Environmental Program Global Mercury Treaty currently under negotiation.
PEDIATRICS clearly states the opinions expressed are the authors and not necessarily those of the AAP or its Committees.
According to Uram, "Decisions affecting millions of children globally should not be based on opinions but on sound science. Todays science clearly shows that all mercury exposure is dangerous, especially for children. Mercury is more toxic than lead, and considered the second most toxic element on Earth after plutonium. Justifying injecting it into humans turns science-based policy to protect public health right on its head."
Download science summary highlighting studies that support removal of thimerosal (updated December 2012):
http://www.safeminds.org/research/docs/Thimerosal%20Science%20Summary%20Dec%202012.pdf
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
70 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
OR we can use vaccines with a known working preservative, and change over if we have a
AtheistCrusader
Dec 2012
#69
Post #57 links to essential reading summarizing the relevant scientific literature.
proverbialwisdom
Dec 2012
#70
There is an anti vaccine contingent. Your snarky response not withstanding.
yellowcanine
Dec 2012
#33
Maybe but if you read those sites they really are anti-vaccine, for whatever reason.
yellowcanine
Dec 2012
#38
"potentially vulnerable children should be considered and insulated from the risks"
yellowcanine
Dec 2012
#45
The video I posted is from a presentation in 2008. Four years, renders the research obsolete?
mzmolly
Dec 2012
#40
Burbacher is a respected scientist and mercury expert, who helped make the case
mzmolly
Dec 2012
#29
Silly as this is getting - I don't believe the claims by big peanut and their surrogates.
mzmolly
Dec 2012
#52
I understand from a public policy stand-point, that we should find cost effective solutions to mass
mzmolly
Dec 2012
#61
Nope, think again starting with any blind defense of Dr. Thorsen's work.
proverbialwisdom
Dec 2012
#59