Enlightening or soft hatchet job? You decide....(the vaccination debate)

Hi folks,

Chcek out this fascinating article:

Why synthetic chemicals seem more toxic than natural ones

On reading through it, aside from finding it very interesting in its own right, I began to think that there may be an element (pun not intended) of conspiracy at work here, in the form of a hatchet job assault on the belief that vaccination contents can cause autism in young children - which, as we all know, has proven a fairly widespread & common complaint from people who don't necessarily 'trust the system' (because we all know, that to mistrust the system, is tantamount to modern day heresy..) It does this in a remarkably simple way, by demonstrating immediately prior to a graph showing the correlation of mercury dose & autism, a graph which could be interpreted to show a causative correlation between the per capita consumption of margarine in Maine, to that town's divorce rate.

Now while this was a canny swipe at a popular conspiratorial belief of the modern age, should we be suspicious of an article which kind of goes out of its way to use one particular conspiracy as the target for what is otherwise a well-rounded & enjoyable, well-presented article? I have an uncomfortable suspicion that the entire article was crafted around the premise: "Use a knowledge of modern toxicology to construct a failsafe knock-down proof that correlation doesn't mean causation in the debate on safe mercury levels in vaccinations.."

The issue of 'anti-vaxxers' has been in the news repeatedly of late (at least here in the UK, and from my recent memory it seems to have been covered fairly well in the USA too). Could this be a legitimate 'soft hatchet job', preparing an article for consumption by readers of a popular intellectual forum's specialist guest writers? The site in question, [url=www.aeon.co[AEON.co[/url] is a generally enjoyable site, frequently promoting items of significant social & scientific interest, which I often turn to for interesting modern stories which may not necessarily make the regular press, but are very deserving of a hearing. In this case though, I feel that the 'guest writer' format may have been abused for the very specific purposes of dealing an intellectual swipe to the anti-vaxxers, through an intellectual, opinion forming website which has sterling pedigree in itself. Only time will tell whether the apparently criminal addition of toxic chemicals to our vaccines will ever be outed properly, and the perpetrators held to account,

Something tells me we may be waiting for a long time..

Cheers,


FITO.

"Natural" chemicals can be just as harmful as "artificial" chemicals, and vice versa.

Do you disagree with that point?

Quote from OP site link:

One can argue that, though there is no conclusive evidence presently to show that some chemicals cause health problems, it’s better to be safe than sorry and so restrict the chemical before health problems emerge. Yet while this idea is tempting, it ignores a basic truth: risk exists in nearly everything. Walking outside (we could get mugged), travelling in cars and planes (we could crash), eating food (we could ingest plant oestrogens or the organic pesticide copper sulphate) or drinking water (parts of the US and Bangladesh have high levels of naturally occurring fluoride and arsenic, respectively). We therefore need to understand probability: is the chemical exposure high enough for a high probability of adverse effects?

Is it probable that pumping mercury into an infant's bloodstream will have adverse effects..???

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Is it probable that pumping mercury into an infant's bloodstream will have adverse effects..???

That would depend upon the form of mercury.
However, I think that mercury adjuncts for pediatric vaccines were discontinued some time ago.

a reply to: Phage

"Natural" chemicals can be just as harmful as "artificial" chemicals, and vice versa.

Do you disagree with that point?

Absolutely not - the article provides excellent exposition on that very point. Five of the most harmful chemicals on Earth are naturally produced.. No argument with the general science under scrutiny - just concerned that in the ONE example I described (the graph showing apparent correlation between mercury dose & autism in children) gives the impression that the whole thing could have been written with the purpose of discrediting the anti-vaxxer claims in that regard.

a reply to: Phage

However, I think that mercury adjuncts for pediatric vaccines were discontinued some time ago.

That's great news if it's the case - do you have a source for the claim, and notes on where the discontinuation took effect?

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

(the graph showing apparent correlation between mercury dose & autism in children)

I don't suppose that changes in the criteria for autism diagnoses might play a role.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Thimerosal was taken out of childhood vaccines in the United States in 2001.

www.cdc.gov...

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

...a graph which could be interpreted to show a causative correlation between the per capita consumption of margarine in Maine, to that town's divorce rate.

Hmmmm.... maybe that's the real coverup. I guarandamtee you that if my hubby made me eat margarine instead of butter, he'd be getting divorce papers! Only (half) joking -- about the coverup, NOT the butter!

It's true that correlation does not necessarily equal causation. And it may be that this author is trying to make a very tiring point in the Vax situation... or he may just be too clever by half...

I couldn't help but chuckle at the "correction" at the end of the article:

Correction: this article originally claimed that toxins produced by plants cause cancer at the same rate as synthetic chemicals. This claim was not supported by current research and has been corrected.

LOL!

originally posted by: Phage
"Natural" chemicals can be just as harmful as "artificial" chemicals, and vice versa.

Do you disagree with that point?

I've heard that water is just as dangerous as dihydrogen monoxide... like that???

a reply to: Phage

The flu vaccine still has mercury

ethylmercury was found to be twice as neurotoxic as methylmercury

This old talking point about mercury types with thimersol (ethyl) supposedly being less toxic is not true.

Either way mercury is still finding its way into developing brains through pregnant mothers getting the flu shot (which has never been ok’d in pregnant women). And directly through the flu shot (which also hasn’t been approved for children)

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Synthetic chemicals are xenobiotics. Foreign things to our makeup. Our genome has developed for millions of years alongside “natural chemicals”. Our body is better adapted to utilize natural things because of this.

This is also an argument against trying to eradicate diseases like the measles. It provides protection against cancer for instance. So we trade a harmless childhood disease (in 1st world conditions) for cancer....

Also ...fungus

Penicillin and the fungus it comes from have the same start date as Autism....a year apart anyway. I saw some video where the speaker said that fungus origination messes with the vaccine, depending on the fungus level already in the patients system....idk

His dates were 1946 for penicillin and 1947 for Autism.....idk

A lot of natural chemicals are toxic. The only reason we can eat some foods is to cook them properly, something the last few generations has swept aside and is disregarding anything that does not fit their beliefs that natural food is safe and can be eaten raw.

Glyphosate is not toxic, but can lead to many health problems if consumed for a long period of time, effecting collogen building because it is an organophosphate attached to glycine. It was way safer when it was only used rarely, now it is being used all over the place.

I cannot take the flu vaccine and also react severely to some other vaccines, but some people need it to fight the flu, Doctors have told me I have natural immunity to the flu and other vaccine diseases that I react severely too. I was told not to take them quite a while ago already, except maybe the tetnus shot if needed, I hardly get any reaction to the tetnus shot but do get a reaction to the TDAP

Plant defense system chemistry is either poison or a medicine. You do not take a medicine unless you need it. Lots of people cannot eat certain veggies and some berries while others can. Lots of people are allergic to nuts, to celery. Nobody can eat everything, the only way a sprig of Mistletoe could have killed Baldor is if he ate it as a challenge.

Some of the worst chemicals in food listed on the lable have names that look harmless.

Comparing synthetic chemicals to organic ones is not that different, organic chemicals sprayed on certified organic foods are often not safe either. The question to act is why do we need to spray way too much chemicals on plants in the first place, I have grown lots of stuff in the garden, most times certain foods do not even need pesticides, but it seems like they spray them anyway, just to make sure they do not have a bad year.

They spray way too much pesticides on commercial foods, I will never agree with that practice, organophosphates are not safe, they have multiple side effects...but rarely are toxic, they do not immediately kill a person or put them in a hospital unless they eat them out of the box or bottle.

I read a lot about these chemicals, I do see that they have a purpose and if you moderately eat some veggies sprayed at reasonable levels, they can be detoxed by the body. I can smell pesticides and herbicides on veggies, I am used to the smell of the commercial ones they use. I do not smell them in the organic veggies, I like the taste of the organic veggies better, but am not going to pay a lot more to buy them organic.

The reference article;s creation was probably paid for by the chemical companies and pesticide companies. What it does say about natural not being safer than synthetic is true to a certain point, but remember, we cannot eat many plants and the only reason we can eat others is if we cook them.

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
Also ...fungus

Penicillin and the fungus it comes from have the same start date as Autism....a year apart anyway. I saw some video where the speaker said that fungus origination messes with the vaccine, depending on the fungus level already in the patients system....idk

His dates were 1946 for penicillin and 1947 for Autism.....idk

The fungus they make penicillin from is one of those used to make Brie cheese. The cheese has been made for a real long time. I doubt if it is tied to autism, although, it is possible that some kids may be intolerant to the penicillin, autism is probably not related to that medicine.