Flu vaccine ingredients – not so scary using simple math

When dealing with those pushing pseudoscience, like the antivaccination cult, the most frustrating thing is that they tend to ignore and deny the most basic tenets of science. If denying the fact of gravity would further their goals of “proving” vaccines are neither effective nor safe, they would do so. And now that it’s flu season, they’re producing zombie tropes about flu vaccine ingredients.

If the antivaccination movement didn’t lead to epidemics of long-gone diseases, which can harm and kill children, the conversation would be over. I would just put the vaccine deniers in the same group as evolution deniers (creationists) or gravity deniers (there has to be some, somewhere). I would mock their pseudoscience, and move on. Of course, their denialism does lead to deaths of children, so we have to do what is right, and stop their lies, misinformation and ignorance in every forum we can.

We have to appeal to scientific values, and despite the fact that antivaccination pushers don’t share those values, we must continue to try. I have gotten enough emails and comments from people that they have started to vaccinate because of what I have written, so maybe some child’s life is better because all of us who support vaccines are heard.

Mathematics and science

To many, mathematics is the foundation of all science. Biology is dependent upon chemistry which is dependent upon physics which is dependent upon mathematics. Of course, I’m oversimplifying the relationships between the various branches of basic science, but my own scientific education moved in roughly the direction of advanced mathematics through basic physics to organic and physical chemistry to biology, cell biology, biochemistry and physiology.

Without mathematics, the scientific method might not make sense, because it requires statistical analysis to find small changes or differences. Though it is long lost from my brain, advanced statistics was necessary in every analysis I performed in my science life. It allowed me to find biological changes with tiny amounts of a hormone or growth factor. I didn’t observe the changes directly, only through mathematical analysis did it become apparent.


flu vaccine ingredients
All of those scary ingredients in the flu vaccine. Except, they’re really not scary.

Above is a photo circulating around social networks that attempt to point out all of the scary flu vaccine ingredients. Of course, if one has an understanding of A) basic human physiology, and B) basic mathematics, including how small numbers are really small, this photo with the scary ingredients highlighted would be laughable. Well, I do have and understanding of both, and this is laughable. I mean so laughable, it’s possible I pulled a muscle.


Dose makes the poison

Let me stress an important point. Dose makes the poison. And the dose here is too low to make it a poison.

If you spend any amount of time on the internet researching science and pseudoscience, you’ll find alarming claims about toxic or poisonous substances in our foods, vaccines, air, water, and so much else. And then you’ll find a lot of people (myself included) who try to present science-based evidence that these substances are neither toxic nor poisonous.

Generally, the pseudoscience argument proceeds along the lines of “this unpronounceable chemical is going to cause cancer.” And the science (read scientific skeptic) side says “wrong!” Or something like that.

Paracelsus, a 16th century Swiss German physician, alchemist, astrologer, is traditionally thought to have founded the discipline of toxicology, an important branch of medicine, physiology, and pharmacology. Paracelsus wrote one of the most important principles of toxicology:

All things are poisons, for there is nothing without poisonous qualities. It is only the dose which makes a thing poison.

In other words, if you’re speaking about substances in foods or vaccines or anything, the most important principle is that the dose makes the poison (or toxin). Everything that we can consume or breathe is potentially toxic, but what is the most overriding principle must be the dose.


Flu vaccine ingredients – formaldehyde

Let’s start with with first highlighted ingredient, formaldehyde. This simple bio-organic molecule is used in the purification of the vaccine (the last thing we want is contamination from viruses or bacteria)– 99.9% of which is removed during the final steps of manufacturing.

The package labeling does not include the amount of formaldehyde in the vaccines because it is so tiny, so minuscule, so veritably invisible, that the amount actually cannot be measured. It’s possible that there is actually no formaldehyde in solution, because it cannot be measured, but the chances are good there is some because the manufacturing process can’t dilute out the vaccine sufficiently to guarantee that every picogram (that’s one trillionth of a gram) is removed, because it would dilute the vaccine’s antigen too.

But I can tell you where formaldehyde can be measure. The normal blood level of formaldehyde is 2.74 +/- 0.14 mg/L. A normal child has a blood volume of 2-3 L, so a normal child has 5-9 mg of formaldehyde floating in her blood, about 1,000,000X more than found in a dose of vaccine. Is that math clear? It would take probably 10-20 million doses of vaccines to just slightly increase the formaldehyde level in your child.

Now you might think “how did that evil formaldehyde get into my sweet child whom I feed organic foods, and don’t let them touch vaccines.” Well, not only do your math skills suck (let me remind the reader, 10 million doses of vaccines to measurably move the formaldehyde level–all at once), but so does your physiology knowledge. The body produces formaldehyde as a byproduct of metabolizing alcohols (not necessarily just from a beer, but the alcohol that is produced in the body and in other foods). And lots of foods contain formaldehyde, including fruits, nuts, and other yummy things.

In addition, formaldehyde is filtered from the blood rather quickly (since it is toxic), and its half-life, that is the average time one-half of the molecules of formaldehyde stay in the blood, is around 1 minute. It does not accumulate, so even if you got that 10-20 million doses of vaccines, the tiny amount of formaldehyde injected would be gone in 1-2 minutes. It is simple math.

Yes, formaldehyde is a carcinogen, it can cause cancer. However, the reference dose (that is the maximum daily dose over a lifetime that would be considered safe) for formaldehyde is around 0.2 mg/kg weight/day. In other words, an average child, let’s say 20 kg (about 48 lbs), could consume 4 mg of formaldehyde a day safely. Again, about 1 million times more formaldehyde than in a single dose of vaccines. Even amongst the most enthusiastic vaccine supporters, no is demanding that children get 1 million vaccinations. Every day. For the rest of their lives.

And formaldehyde occurs naturally everywhere. It’s in apples, up to 22 ppm (parts per million). Or around 11 mg of formaldehyde. Maybe that old saying about an apple a day should be ended?

Once again, it is just the math.

Are we clear on this? The math doesn’t support the ludicrous claims that formaldehyde in vaccines is poisoning our children.


Flu vaccine ingredients – thiomersal

So let’s move on to the other highlighted flu vaccine ingredients, and that’s the old canard, dangerous thiomersal (or thimerosal in the USA–my education is 100% US based, but for some reason I’ve used the non-USA spelling for 30 years). Let’s make some points clear right now. This is NOT mercury in its elemental form, which you might remember from old-style medical thermometers. So there isn’t a pool of mercury in the vaccine vial. Moreover, thiomersal is ONLY used, at least in vaccines, in multi-use vials, these days, only the flu vaccine.

Thiomersal is a toxic compound, there is no denying that. But let’s get back to math. The toxicity of compounds is measured through an analysis called the dose-response relationship. This describes the change in effect on an organism caused by differing doses of a compound after a certain exposure time. Table salt is tasty and safe in small amounts, but could kill you if taken in huge amounts. The dose-response relationship provides a graph that mathematically describes what amounts of a compound causes what effects. This would seem to be a logical, and easily understood concept. Unfortunately, for many individuals, a bad substance is always bad.

First of all, the half-life of thiomersal in blood is around 2.2 days. That might seem long, but it means half is gone in a couple of days, cleared out by the kidneys. It does not accumulate.

But the math is even more telling. This flu vaccine, given once a year, has a maximum dose of 25 micrograms of mercury (but not elemental mercury). According to an NIH database, the LD50, that is, the approximate dose at which 50% of organisms will die (in this case a mouse), is 98 mg/kg body weight, if delivered subcutaneously, generally how vaccines are delivered.

A 20 kg child would get 25 micrograms of non-elemental mercury (remember, thimerosal is not mercury) in one injection every year. The theoretical LD50 dose for that same child would be around 2000 mg of thiomersal, or about 80,000 times higher than the amount of thiomersal in one vaccine dose–if vaccines used in children actually had thiomersal, which it doesn’t.

So, you would have to inject your child 80,000 times a day, every day, to make it potentially toxic. And no, dose-response relationships are not linear. That doesn’t mean that there’s some tiny risk of death from even a small dose of thiomersal. There is actually NO risk. And again, since there’s no thiomersal in pediatric vaccines this argument is ridiculous.

Clearly, we have solid scientific data that show us that thiomersal is totally unrelated to autism. And it is completely safe in vaccines. This illogical removal of thiomersal from vaccines makes it nearly impossible to have multi-use vials. Thus, every vaccine must be a single-use prefilled syringe. That has rapidly driven up the costs of vaccines. Wait. That’s more evidence that antivaccination lunatics are in the pockets of Big Pharma. They pushed to get rid of thiomersal to make more profits for Big Pharma. That was an awesome move on their part.


Those scary flu vaccine ingredients

So there it is. Simple math shows us that these are not dangerous toxins being injected into our kids. Sadly, simple math may not be in the list of skills of vaccine deniers. Dose makes the poison, and these doses are so low, they are undeniably safe.

And if you’re worried about formaldehyde (you shouldn’t be), then avoid apples and pears. Because every apple has twice the formaldehyde of a flu vaccine shot. This is what happens when you science something – you get a better picture of the facts.

More simple math problems for vaccine deniers in my follow up article.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published in March 2014. It has been completely updated several times to include more comprehensive information, to improve readability and to add current research. Oh, and to remove an egregious mathematics error. See, I told you, math matters to science.



Please help me out by sharing this article. Also, please comment below, whether it's positive or negative. Of course, if you find spelling errors, tell me!

There are two ways you can help support this blog. First, you can use Patreon by clicking on the link below. It allows you to set up a monthly donation, which will go a long way to supporting the Skeptical Raptor
Become a Patron!

Finally, you can also purchase anything on Amazon, and a small portion of each purchase goes to this website. Just click below, and shop for everything.

The Original Skeptical Raptor
Chief Executive Officer at SkepticalRaptor
Lifetime lover of science, especially biomedical research. Spent years in academics, business development, research, and traveling the world shilling for Big Pharma. I love sports, mostly college basketball and football, hockey, and baseball. I enjoy great food and intelligent conversation. And a delicious morning coffee!

296 Replies to “Flu vaccine ingredients – not so scary using simple math”

  1. LD50 of a substance can in no way determine degree of toxicity. Lethality yes. There is a fallacy in the above argument and many such arguments: that is using LD50 as a measurement of harm, including presumed negligible harm. If it takes a gram of a substance to kill half of the study animals, do you assume a tiny amount is harmless? It’s a long way from metabolic harm to outright death.

  2. http://www.nvic.org/Vaccines-and-Diseases/Influenza.aspx

    Not sure why SR has to be so caustic but maybe only boorish people have facts? Why are you so threatened by the views of others who disagree with you?

    In other news, what about the facts in the link above? We can talk dosage all we want, but there are also facts in the numbers of those who have had negative, and often severely negative, side effects. You might say the percentage is low, but why shouldn’t a person simply be allowed to decide whether or not it makes sense to get the flu shot. The percentage of the entire population who actually have a severe encounter with the flu is also relatively low. If a person doesn’t want to be injected with a vaccine that guesses at the three most likely viruses of the season out of over a hundred, it seems we should respect autonomy.

  3. An anonymous person asked me to post this comment for them. Here it is:

    Your article reminds me of an exchange I had several years ago with an antivaccinationists. She posted a list of vaccine ingredients obtained from the CDC website and exclaimed this was proof. The first ingredient on the list was albumin. I pointed out that this was egg whites. She never responded.

    As for mercury and formaldehyde:

    The average American gets about 6 micrograms of mercury per day from the air we breath, food and water, and small scratches. Eons ago mercury was in much higher concentrations in the environment and bacteria developed mechanisms for detoxifying it and remove it. We have similar mechanisms. The amount of thimerosal (49% mercury) used in vaccines is miniscule compared to what we normally get. Also, it is only in killed vaccines, not, for instance, in the MMR, an attenuated vaccine. The only vaccine for children that contains thimerosal in the US is the flu vaccine and there is a thimerosal-free version; but it is more costly as it comes in single-dose packages. Thimerosal is used to prevent multi-dose container vaccines from being contaminated by bacteria.

    Formaldehyde is actually produced by our own bodies. The amount used in vaccines is miniscule compared to this. Worrying about formaldehyde, just as the antivaccinationist who thought egg whites a dangerous chemical, simply shows the ignorance of some people. As for “hardly anybody understands them,” it would have been simple to look up albumin and formaldehyde online. The daily dose of mercury would be more difficult to find; but the reason thimerosal is used is clearly explained.

    As for numerous examples of scientific fraud and error, there have been cases of both; but the strength of science is its public verifiability. Scientists around the world critique research and often try to replicate it. Eventually, sometimes sooner, sometimes later, the “truth” comes out; however, since vaccines have been around over 200 years, though most within the past 70 years or so, since they are given mainly to children as a preventative, and they are often mandated, we have research from literally around the world by researchers from different cultures, political systems, health care systems, etc. who have been looking at them and continue to do so. And the regulations in the US for vaccines are more stringent and demanding than for anything else. Any hint, as with the first rotavirus vaccine, of a problem, and the FDA and CDC calls for a stop while investigating. For other pharmaceuticals it can take years, even decades to get them off the market, despite strong evidence of adverse events and/or lack of effectiveness. And, until recently, our government, for foods contaminated by e-coli, salmonella, etc. could only request a voluntary recall. So, vaccines may not be perfect, and the research goes on; but in the scheme of things they are actually the safest product on the market.

    1. Well well well, have a look at the irony/contradictions in “someone else’s” statement that you obviously agree with. Vaccines made by the same people who make the unsafe drugs that cause death and injury that don’t get pulled from shelves for decades despite the adverse effects and lack of effectiveness in obviously false safety and efficacy studies……..But of course it must be that the manufacturers and their partner agencies just take more pride in the safety and effectiveness of vaccines than the rest of their “health” products….

  4. What a bunch of propaganda…when will we ever hear any real news again. “. If denying the fact of gravity would further their goals of “proving” ” This kind of statement is what propaganda is!

  5. I read this article and the math for thimerosal doesn’t appear to be correct. 5000mg/kg is the LD50 for Dimercaptosucchinic Acid which is unrelated to Thimerosal.

    For comparison purposes here are the LD50 values for Methylmercury and Ethylmercury and Thimerosal.

    Methylmercury: Intraperitoneal (monkey) LD50: 5.6 mg/kg

    Methylmercury: Intraperitoneal (rat) LD50: 11 mg/kg

    Methylmercury: Oral (rat) LD50: 29.915 mg/kg


    Ethylmercury: LD50 Oral – rat – 40 mg/kg


    Thimerosal: ORAL (LD50): Acute: 75 mg/kg [Rat].


    So you can see that in rats Methylmercury is 30% more toxic(deadly) than Ethylmercury and it is far more toxic when it is injected intraperitoneally and it is twice as toxic in monkeys.

    Thimerosal is 50% Ethylmercury by weight and Thimerosal gets metabolised to Ethylmercury very quickly in our body.

    So we can safely assume that in mammals Ethylmercury is more deadly than Elemental mercury.

    Now we take the oral LD50 values for Ethylmercury in rats (40mg/kg) and adjust them.

    Keep in mind that the mercury in flu shots is injected and we have seen above mercury was twice as toxic in monkeys.

    In the above example injected mercury was 6 times more toxic in monkeys than oral mercury in rats.

    40mg/6= 6.6mg

    So we could expect the LD50 values for injected Ethylmercury in monkeys to be around 6.6mg/kg.

    For a 20kg human the LD50 would be 133mg Ethylmercury that is 5300 flu shots that would be needed to cause death.

    That is 300.000 times less than what would find.

    Another problem with your calculation:

    You write the LD50 value would be needed to make it potentially toxic or before it can do any harm.

    The LD50 value means that it is potentially DEADLY. A substance can be potentially TOXIC long before it is potentially deadly.


    If you want to know the lowest dose where toxic effects can occur you would have to look at the lowest-observed-adverse-effect level (LOAEL)


    In mercury toxicity the LOAEL is only a small fraction of the LD50 which means you will get toxic effects long before you see death. While it is unethical to study this in humans it is sadly allowed with animals and there are many animal studies that show this.

    If you want to know if a specific dose is likely to be safe for humans you would want to compare the acute reference dose(RfD):

    A reference dose is the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s maximum acceptable oral dose of a toxic substance.


    There aren’t any available reference doses for ethylmercury.

    There are reference doses for elemental mercury and organic mercurials(mostly chronic i believe) but it is not known how well they would apply to acute ethylmercury exposure. Generally most of the more toxic known mercury species including elemental mercury are fairly toxic and the reference doses are not surprisingly quite low and in the microgram/kg range.


    Your simple math makes the mercury in the flu shot look at least 1 million times less toxic than it actually is.

    According to your calculations you would have to give 4 million shots a day -that would be 1.4 billion shots/year – to cause any harm in one single child.

    In reality your “patient” would have a 50% chance of dying after the the first 5000 shots and would likely have some brain damage after the first 250 shots.

    With the thimerosal from 1.4 billion shots you could actually kill over 100.000 children.(That is based on either the published LD50 value for Ethylmercury or the LD50 of Thimerosal and assuming 25mcg Ethylmercury per shot- see link below) .



    So the calculations are far off and have nothing to do with real-world scenarios.

    Thanks for reading. 🙂

    1. That was a long read. I’m not sure what went wrong with my links, but I’m not an idiot, I do know the difference between ethyl mercury and Dimercaptosucchinic Acid. Obviously, a link went awry, which I fixed.

      You went to town with a lot of misinformation there. Like not understanding the point of the 4 million or 80,000 shots. The water content will be more deadly than the thiomersal.

      Your assumption of some straight line from 0 to death is amusing. Very amusing.

  6. This product contains aluminum that may be toxic. Aluminum may reach toxic levels with prolonged parental administration if kidney function is impaired. Premature neonates are particularly at risk because their kidneys are immature, and they require large amounts of calcium and phosphate solutions, which contain aluminum.

    [email protected]

  7. Seriously? Stating that the amount of mercury in any single vaccine is negligible is ignorant and offensive. Anyone with a hint of intelligence knows that the body cannot rid itself of heavy metals – such as mercury and aluminium. They build up over time causing a whole host of physical problems. And, guess what? It’s not even effective in preventing the flu! How ignorant you must think your readers are that we cannot conduct our own research into the Truth.

    1. Did you ever take a chemistry course? Didn’t think so. But let’s clear up your own ignorance and foolishness.

      1. Vaccines do not contain mercury of at any level.
      2. Vaccines never contained mercury.
      3. Thiomersal is not mercury.

      We’re done here. After you’ve overcome your Dunning Kruger cognitive bias, please take a chemistry course at a real accredited university, and we’ll talk. Until then, hasta la vista.

      1. Name calling, my dear, does not render one intelligent, but it does expose one’s apparent refusal to acknowledge facts that do not strictly coincide with one’s subjective opinion. No one requires a ‘chemistry course’ to read. FYI: quoted directly from the CDC site:

        “Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative used in some vaccines and other products since the 1930’s.”

        You see, no chemistry course required!

        1. Once again, no. A chemistry course is required for you, because you have no clue what constitutes elemental mercury and organic mercury. Seriously, how do you go through life with such fucking ignorance.

          1. It seems I have hit a nerve; otherwise, you would not have resorted to vexatious vulgarity over thoughtful ponderance of the subject. Again, no chemistry course required. 🙂

            1. Once again, no peer reviewed papers. And, despite your lame protestations, there isn’t one molecule of “mercury” in any vaccine. But enjoy your delusion.

            2. Nor your failure to read beyond what you are determined to believe. It’s been nice chatting though. And, since it is clear that you like to have the last word, I look forward to receiving your well wishes. 🙂

            3. I guess you flunked simple math. Sad that you need to show off your ignorance on the internet.

              As for Last Word. I hear it’s a good hand cannon for PvP on Destiny.

        2. And table salt is both a sodium- and a chlorine-containing compound. Neither is recommended to season your fries.

          Methyl alcohol and ethyl alcohol (like methyl mercury and ethyl mercury) both contain the same word in them, but I’d only want one of them showing up in my shot glass.

          And yes, these are both fair analogies.

      2. The CDC says that, “Thimerosal is an ethyl mercury-based preservative used in vials that contain more than one dose of a vaccine (multi-dose vials) to prevent germs, bacteria and/or fungi from contaminating the vaccine.”

        The FDA says that “Thimerosal is a mercury-containing organic compound (an organomercurial).”

        So you are saying both that the CDC AND the FDA are wrong?

        Even though the amount of thimerosal in vaccines may be trivial, it still contains Mercury.



  8. Your simple math seems to have been over your head. The flu vaccine is not 100% ineffective, except, possibly in your own mind.

    As for your ad hominem and strawman arguments? Not interested in playing your game of ignorance.

    1. Seriously? Saying the flu vaccine is not 100% ineffective is the same as saying it is NOT effective. Research the collusion between the CDC and BigPharma, that may give you an indication about the true motive behind vaccines.

          1. I think the clear point @skepticalraptor:disqus was trying to make was that even though the flu vaccine varies in effectiveness from year to year, it is never 100% ineffective. In good years, it tends to average about 60% effectiveness, vs. this season where it was closer to 18%-23%. Even so, it’s still way better than nothing. 100s of people die from the flu in the US each year, and thousands are hospitalized. So that 20% does equate to an actual number of reduced morbidity and mortality.

            1. way better than nothing

              I think the juriy’s still out on that, man. By May of this year, there were actually more deaths and serious injuries reported from the vaccine than from the flu itself.

              This is what Sharryl Attkisson has her panties in a bunch over right now. The explosion in vaccine injury claims since the flu vaccine was added to the CDC schedule in 2005.

            2. vaccine injury claims =/= deaths or serious injuries caused by the vaccine. Please tell me where you got that number for vaccine injuries and deaths from flu vaccine. Thanks!

            3. The explosion in ‘reported’ vaccine injury claims is only due to the increasing numbers of people/parents willing to stand up against the doctors telling them that it was a mere ‘coincidence’ that their child either died or was severely and/or permanently injured as a result of an ENFORCED vaccine injection. The CDC (and it’s cohorts in the pharmaceutical industry) have known all along of the dangerous side-effects of the vaccines they ‘educated’ doctors to inject into babies. This is why they established the ‘National Vaccine Injury Fund’ established in 1988…..seriously: http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html.

              Yet, are parents informed of this at the (mandated) ‘check-ups’ for their babies? Nope. Parents are told ‘risks’ are ‘negligible’. And, if a parent calls a doctor after their child was vaccinated to report a fever or other serious side-effect, they are told to ignore it. Parents are led to question their own intuition and to trust a doctor educated by a medical school funded by pharmaceutical companies (seriously…start your investigation here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4696316). Beyond that, does anyone even question why baby ‘wellness’ visits automatically coincide with vaccine injections?

              I have seen first hand the dangerous side-effects of vaccines. I would urge any parent who experiences ANY reaction in their child following a vaccine injection (and, btw, it’s never one injection at a time….it’s several) to demand that the doctor report the adverse reaction to the CDS. Doctors are not taught to inform parents of this right (hmmm…wonder why???), but a parent has the right to make that demand. Parents should take notes and take pictures. You are your child’s only advocate. A doctor will probably send your child for ‘further tests’ to rule out ‘allergies’ (really?….a child on breast milk and/or formula suddenly has ‘allergies’ after a vaccine that need to be ruled out instead of acknowledging the harmful effects of the vaccine?).

              All I’m saying here is, don’t buy into the hype and propaganda. Do your own research….with an open mind.

            4. Well, that’s bullshit so I didn’t read past the first sentence.

              There’s an equally valid argument the increase in claims is from attorneys who see easy money in the way VICF is set up. Just looking at the data from HRSA, more than half the claims paid were for the flu shot, and every instance was an adult.

      1. Leaving the numbers aside for a moment, the fact is that it has been those with weakened immune systems that contract the flu virus. So, instead of pumping bodies with vaccines containing so many threatening ingredients that tax an already struggling immune system, why not explore WHY so many people (in this ‘day and age’) have weakened immune systems? What exactly is contributing to the apparent demise of the human body’s inherent ability to fight off disease? If I dare say why, I’m sure to be labeled a ‘conspiracy theorists’ or other such labels designed by those who don’t want us to ‘look behind the curtain’. However, I would urge anyone interested in looking beyond their comfort zone to investigate geo-engineering, chemtrails, HAARP, Monsanto, GMO’s, fluoride, and, yes, vaccines. Please, just take off the gloves and approach the subjects from the perspective of a child learning something new for the first time: No preconceived ideas.

        Keep in mind that Native Americans lived on the North American continent for centuries without falling ill from the infectious diseases the CDC and its cohorts at Merck, et al like to pimp out a vaccine and/or pill for (to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars in profit and ‘kick backs’) to ‘prevent’. The same holds true for numerous other societies before they were decimated by colonial conquest. The human body was meant to fight off infection! That is why we run a fever….it’s the body’s way of fighting infection! And, coincidentally, this is exactly what happens when children are vaccinated: They spike a fever. This has less to do with the body building up a ‘resistance’ as we are told, and more to do with the body trying to protect itself against the onslaught of crap in the vaccines. We are ‘told’ this is ‘normal’.

        Tell me, how is it normal to inject a baby with dozens of vaccines containing horrific ingredients before the age of 2? (If you really want to know, look here: http://www.informedchoice.info/cocktail.html). How is a small child’s body supposed to have the natural defenses against these toxic ingredients? And, worse, what are the long-term implications (assuming the child survives)? And, assuming you are taking an objective approach to the inquiry, ask yourself this: When a baby is injected with the dna of another being (dog, monkey, pig, cow, fetus…..), is that baby’s dna not being irreparably altered? Where are the studies on this? I just find it ironic that the ‘general population’ can’t understand why, for example, the followers of Jim Jones would have their children ‘drink the Kool-aide’, but we all are so quick to voluntarily offer our children up to be injected with a Kool-aide offered by ‘leaders’ of a different sort. It’s nothing short of madness.

        I am sorry that those of you who take such a harsh opposing viewpoint to my right to say I do not want to see a baby or child forcibly injected with toxins somehow believe that I am ‘crazy’ because I dare question what those in power say is ‘best’ for me, my child, my grandchild – or anyone’s child. I believe it is downright dangerous to believe what anyone has to say if they have a stake in the outcome (profit, power, control). For the record, I am NOT going willingly to the gas chambers….I’ll go kicking and screaming, thank you. And, if I can wake enough of the sleeping masses up along the way, then I’m A-Okay with being ‘crazy’.

  9. Look at morbidity rates once vaccines were introduced. Because of vaccines, no more smallpox and polio is ALMOST gone too. And the almighty one study to rule them all is complete BS because it is UNETHICAL to say to a group ‘hey this will protect you from measles’ when you’re really just giving them a saline solution. And btw in order for it to be ‘acceptable’ it would HAVE to be a double-blind which means, hey you can’t just volunteer your kid for the non-vax group. Cohort data and statistic (hence, HEY IT’S JUST SIMPLE MATH MORONS) are the best available data we have and they all say that vaccines are safe and effective.

    And it’s NOT hysteria because it is still spreading. Up into Quebec now. And tell the parents of the healthy German baby who recently died from measles that it’s ‘nothing’.

    Pull your head out of your ass and stop trying to sound like you know more than you do.

    1. Again, Chi, you missed the point. I see you’re getting good at memorizing and regurgitating. It’s very simple to take existing records (i.e. vaccination records, cause of illness/death records, etc. We don’t need to do a whole new study. But those who would have interest in such studies appear to have no interest at all. Also, why would you need to give anybody a placebo of a vaccine? Just keep an eye on people who haven’t been vaccinated, pretty simple really. As for the measles, it’s no longer an issue after that teeny little outbreak. There was a little outbreak back in 2010 that amounted to basically nothing. I just googled and couldnt find anything about the Measles outbreak being an issue still. I know you want a lot of people to die from this disease to prove your point, but it’s just not the case.

      Oh, and I don’t pretend to know anything, but you clearly do. You clearly know all the ins and outs of the issue, which you obviously don’t. You have heard some things and picked your side. All I’m doing is pointing out that the hysteria is misguided, and it makes people like you who have picked a side angry. And that’s kind of funny, you’ll learn.

    2. Correlation does not equal causation. You know what else has become more common since vaccines were introduced? The usage of soap and other sterilizing agents.

      You don’t have to do a brand new study to find out information that is already available in medical records (i.e. look at people who have died from measles, for example, and see if they were vaccinated). But of course these studies haven’t been done. I’ve heard that argument before, that it’s unethical to do the study. I see you’ve regurgitated that idea.

      I googled measles and it looks like the measles hysteria was overblown, as usual. you say one baby died from the measles, that sucks. How did he get it? Well according to http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6316a6.htm, of the 54 cases studied in the 2014 “outbreak” 19 of them were unvaccinated due to their own reasons, whereas 15 either had two doses of the vaccine or were shown to have “serologic evidence of immunity.” So, we don’t know how the baby got the measles, who it came from in the first place. Could have been somebody who received two doses of the vaccine, could have been an anti-vaxxer.

      I invite you to take your head out of your ass now.

      1. Google education eh? Good for you. My education actually required me to get off my fucking ass and study. You apparently haven’t got that particular skill.

        And since you can’t read, you apparently missed the point of the fucking article. You flunk simple math again. There are 15X more vaccinated kids than unvaccinated, so the raw data will show more vaccinated kids with measles. But you ignorant dumbass, it’s the RATE that matters. I can’t deal with your 3rd grade logic skills.

        1. Once again, anger. What it shows is that its not as cut and dry as you are hoping it is. Where’s your evidence from all your “studying”? You are an insecure, habitual liar. Your comments, your tone, and your thought processes reveal you have no idea what you are talking about, and that you are looking to be accepted in to the majority (which speaks to lack of friends as a child). You claim to be so morally and scientifically aware. Perhaps when you reach your 25th birthday you will start to realize how little you know, and how empowering it is to realize how little you know. There’s still time for you, Raptor. A simple way to start is to stop thinking you know, and start listening to all sides of the story. Take in the information for what it is and make your best guess as to how it applies to your life. Most things don’t have a right or wrong answer, so quit looking for the right answer, and quit shitting on people who disagree. You’ll be happier for it, and you’ll gain a friend or two in the process.

  10. Do the kids choose? No, so your logic fails right out of the gate. More evidence that you’re an ignorant fool.

    There are hundreds of studies that actually show what you’re asking. But you’re simply too ignorant to go search for it.

    Yeah, to you the “measles scare” was nothing. To the parents who had to deal with it, it wasn’t. So you’re a fucking narcissistic ignorant fool. Good to know.

    What a maroon.

    1. Do the kids choose what? You sure are an angry little fella. You haven’t learned this yet, so I’ll tell you. People whose sole argument revolves around personal attacks has no credibility and no subject-relevant knowledge. So stop getting angry because somebody disagrees with your “team.”

      And no, there are no studies to show what I’ve asked. I’ve looked, I’ve asked as a comment to many other articles. The only response I ever get is, “well where did small pox go then, you ignorant ass hole.” Just a bunch of dummies who get mad and spew insults. The most intelligent answers I’ve received have been something like this, “the studies haven’t been done because it’s very unethical to do a study in which you give a placebo vaccine to people.” But again, that ignores all the readily available medical records that exist.

      And ya, the measles scare didn’t kill anybody. Illness sucks, sure, but not to the point where people start demanding mandatory vaccinations when there is no proof that such a policy would have any effect. If mandatory vaccines would really help save the 1 or 2 people that may have died from the measles, imagine what making fast food places illegal would do to help people stay alive. Why can’t we make fast food places illegal? Because of freedom of choice, that’s why.

      Call me what you will, including the colour maroon (I guess that’s a racist comment you made?). But quite cleary the ignorant fool is the guy who calls himself skeptical raptor but is in no way skeptical at all. Skepticism is not blindly following along with what the majority says, skepticism is seeing if, in your opinion, the majority is correct, and if something doesn’t make sense that the majority are arguing for, the skeptic digs deeper in to that issue.

  11. The science of vaccines is not as perfect as it seems and
    is being made out to be here. For one thing, There is no mention that because the flu viruses are constantly changing so, the composition of influenza vaccines
    changes every year or season:



    at what I hope is a credible link:

    it says this:

    4 things you might not know about the flu
    There is no live virus in the flu shot.
    The composition of the vaccine changes
    every year.
    The flu shot is safe for pregnant women at
    all stages of their pregnancy.
    bioCSL Fluvax® is not recommended for
    children under 5 years of age.

    So the mathematics regarding the quantity of the contents maybe be relevant for one season/year, but given the composition of the vaccine changing every year/season, a fact that’s been omitted or not mentioned in this “revelation” that is being made by the mathematics regarding the quantities of the compounds contained in a vaccine being so small, why worry? Nor does the package labeling mention that the composition, most probably with its quantity and type differs from season to season, has also been omitted. Maybe the name of it may be a clue to it being different from the last but because of the inconsistencies of the content of the product and the differing chemical compounds contained within it, you’d be putting your trust and hope into something that can also let you down badly, with deadly results when it does.

      1. Even you say “it’s just simple math”. Simple math is as exact as it gets. If it’s exact as that, then to me it seems that such an idea is flawless and perfect.
        I’m not an anti vaxxer either.

        I just can’t take for granted that manufactured vaccines are going to save a lot of us forever but will rather screw us because it’s not as “perfect” solution as it’s sometimes made out to be to many. It’s simply good old Reductionism , if anything.

        What happened to the cures we were led to believe that we would one day get?
        No big business for big pharma in doing that, now is there?

        Here’s another recent example of taking it for granted that “big pharma” , Roche in this case, has tried to suck us in. How can anyone put their trust in being vaccinated , against ANYTHING now, is beyond me, when this occurs?
        Don’t argue with me about it, just read the facts:


          1. Flunk what? Stupidity. Thanks. Glad you think so because, it’s a well know fact amongst many in the know, that you just cant fix stupid….especially with a vaccine and that’s a given.

            So part of the confirmation bias you think I am using , to inform you or anyone else that has failed to include the other FACTS, like bringing to your attention, alerting you to information like this media release on Roche’s own website form 2007


            “Roche and Transgene enter partnership on therapeutic vaccines against HPV-mediated diseases Roche to develop and commercialize products from Transgene’s programme”

            Can this be construed and twisted by you as being in some way a misleading statistical error and who’s interpreting the facts wrong?

            I sure as hell have not ignored anything. Human kind has endured a hard fought battle in it’s need to avoid dying from the diseases bourne out of the pandemics/plagues but suggesting that the only way is through the use of medications developed by institutions who’s interests is making money only and letting us believe that we will not get through unless we are solely dependent on them for a solution is ALSO VERY dangerous.

            and you call me an idiot because your not?

            If anything is obviously clear here, it’s that you are a DAMNED biased idiot, that seems they can’t appreciate an honest and factual rebuttal.

  12. Just curious – why do Japan and Finland recommend less than half the total doses of vaccines before age 1 than the United States? There must be a bunch of pseudoscience in Japan – why don’t they agree with the CDC that the HPV vaccine is completely safe? And why is the under 5 mortality rate in both of those countries less than half that of the United States. Probably just a funny correlation. Maybe all the kids in those countries just eat lots of fish?

    1. Hey, here’s another stupid question for you! Why, in the UK, have they banned fluoride in water, considering it to be a dangerous chemical, and yet the US upholds it in its ability to whiten and strengthen teeth? Now, how about we look at those results of a normal mouth of a Brit versus an American. Hoh, Americans have, in general, better mouth hygiene, yet we’re using a “dangerous” chemical. How dare we.

      Here’s another question that has a bit more correlation: why, I wonder, are the weight limits so stringent for those in Asia, particularly Japan? This would be due to the fact that health hazards are considerably higher for Asians when they would be in a perfectly normal range for several other races. Why is that? You should probably ask a biologist or genealogist for that answer. Point is, the doses taken for Asians are meant for those particular body types – using more would be overkill in many cases.

      I can’t say anything for Finland, but that is what the case would be in Japan.

          1. he’s just hoping that no one will read your post, and dismiss it based on his saying “racist” even though that is totally preposterous.

            1. Incapable of reading? I accused no one of being a racist, just wondering what the fuck Denversun was saying. But he’s all over the place and has nothing much to say.

              And his facts show his head is far up his ass. That’s not racist either, just a fucking idiot.

    2. Wait. Maybe it’s because they have different vaccines that bundle more into one? Oh that’s the reason. Damn that was hard to dig up.

      Oh, and infant mortality? How about you ask your racist/anti-poor Republicans who don’t care if the poor or non-whites die early. Has nothing to do with vaccines you idiot.

      1. You do well at name-calling Raptor. But, to the point, there are numerous examples of scientific ERROR and FRAUD that have been admitted/proved surrounding “studies” performed that supposedly find no link between vaccines and autism or other serious neurological and endocrine disorders. From companies spiking the blood samples to elicit the response they need to show, to CDC whistleblowers admitting they removed important data (about poor-non-whites no less) that links vaccines to autism, to vaccine manufacturers who mistakenly passed along cancerous SV-40 in their shots to millions of people, to the incestuous revolving door between executives in BigPharma and the govt organizations that are supposedly policing them–not to mention the funding aspect. You must admit the process is and a has been seriously flawed on multiple levels– and all this built within a paradigm of corporate legal immunity, under the guise of offering long-lasting individual immunity…
        It is not hard to understand why many adults are skeptical of the playing field.

  13. I vaccinate my kids. If I didn’t and I read this article it certainly wouldn’t change my mind. It would piss me off. Calling people names, questioning their intelligence, and poking fun aren’t ways to sway someone to your side. And that’s what you want to do, right? Or did you just want to write a smart-ass article to glorify yourself?

    1. Could care less. Quit reading here if you don’t like it. People who don’t vaccinate are child abusers.

      I don’t give a shit what you think of me. And if you think my ego is somehow satiated by writing this article, that we would be no. Get me in a Ferrari with Jennifer Aniston, sure, there my ego would be inflated and I would write about it in a blog. Otherwise, WTF?

      1. “Gravity deniers”. Yep, you’re just an asshat equating the two. It shows that your powers of reason must be less than those you attempt to insult. Congrats, you got one read from me. If your blog was written on paper, it would be better suited on a roll of tissue in the men’s room at a Mexican restaurant.

      2. If I don’t vaccinate against Hepatitis B, I’m an abuser? If so, it stands to reason that almost all Scandinavian kids are being abused because universal vaccination against HepB is not applied there?

        One could make the argument that giving a low-risk child a shot of adjuvant at birth is abuse. But, I wouldn’t go that far.

  14. Believe it or not, I’ve actually met a gravity denier. I was at a potluck, and this guy who I had seen at a few previous get-togethers came up to me and started talking. We talked about martial arts, psuedoscience, skepticism, and eventually started debating about the nature of the universe and what is possible. He was trying to convince me of a lot of ga ga stuff like how he studied some kind of martial art under his master and that his master could fly by ignoring the human constructed belief that gravity exists, and that he was learning to do it as well. Something like that at least. Most of my responses were along the lines of “why should I believe that?” and eventually he offered to demonstrate. Not flying, since he still wasn’t good at that, but pushing me without touching me using chi. We went over to the side of the house away from people and he had me stand in a particular way as he proceeded to make all these weird motions with his arms. After maybe 5 minutes (a very long and awkward 5 minutes), I asked him if I was supposed to feel something, and I think he said something about being confused why it wasn’t working. I think he was embarrassed so I just kind of laughed it off with him, but yeah, that was my experience with an honest to god gravity denier!

  15. Hi dude,

    Just wanted to add a resource to the list: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-states-should-aim-for-100-percent-vaccination/

    Math is great. I am currently enrolled in a Coursera series presented by Johns Hopkins University: https://www.coursera.org/specialization/jhudatascience/1. I recommend this series and the various free on-line courses in statistics to anyone interested in public health.

    Happy New Year and better science in 2015!

  16. I love the critical analysis, thanks! I’ve been vaccinating my kid, but on a schedule that doesn’t give him more than one aluminum-containing shot at a time. That’s the substance used as an adjuvant instead of thimerosal these days. A chapter in Dr. Sears’ “The Vaccine Book” (which, contrary to popular opinion, is NOT anti-vaccine), highlights the lack of research done as to the effects of vaccine-level doses of aluminum in children and infants. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this, if you have any critical research or information to share. Thanks!

    1. Yes, we all know what aluminum is and how it works with vaccines. But read the title of this post–it’s simple math. And you have some serious misinformation there.

      I’m going to do a full-on article about aluminum in vaccines, but let me give you the highlights:

      1. There is no evidence that aluminum is related to any neurological condition.
      2. Thiomersal was NEVER an adjuvant. It is an anti-fungal that prevented contamination in multi-use vials.
      3. Aluminum is an adjuvant, which enhances the immune response to the vaccine.
      4. The amount of aluminum in vaccines is measured in micrograms. If your child got every single vaccine recommended for year 1, they would receive around 4 mg of aluminum. A child can consume up to 1mg/kg/day, which, for a 10 kg one year old would mean that they were consuming 3000-3600 mg 750-900X the dose from vaccines.
      5. The aluminum salt used in vaccines is quickly cleared by the kidneys. So the tiny amount, versus what is consumed and inhaled, is simply not going to have any biological issue.
      6. We know what aluminum does to children at extremely low doses. NOTHING. Don’t invent a problem that simply does not exist.

      Dr. Sears IS a vaccine denier. What scientific evidence has ever published supporting his claims of a new vaccine schedule? Does he have any background in vaccines.


      You’re worried about a strawman that doesn’t exist.

      1. So, having read the Vaccine Book, I can say that the arguments Dr. Sears presents are definitely not anti-vaccine. I quote from his preface: “There is little doubt that vaccines have played a useful role in eliminating some diseases from our population, and limiting many others…” He cites Smallpox and Polio as two prime examples. These are definitely not the views of an anti-vaxxer. Perhaps he has radicalized since writing the book, I don’t know, but based on what I’ve read, he is certainly not a vaccine denier.

        Now, I’m getting some conflicting information about the potential toxicity of aluminum from Ch. 15 of his book and your recent post. His assertion is that the few studies that have been done are inconclusive at best, and none focus on toxicity in children and infants. If you have access to this chapter of the book, please revisit the section on aluminum. This book was published in 2007. If you know of additional studies have been undertaken since then that provide more clarity on this subject, that would be super helpful.


        1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22001122
          Here is a link to a study conducted by the FDA Office of Biostatistics and Epidemology in 2011. This is just the abstract, but it gives you a good outline of their methodology and:
          “We conclude that episodic exposures to vaccines that contain aluminum adjuvant continue to be extremely low risk to infants and that the benefits of using vaccines containing aluminum adjuvant outweigh any theoretical concerns.”

          1. People worry about things that really don’t require worrying. There is no evidence that aluminum does anything to anyone. Sure eat 14 kg of aluminum salt, that would be bad.

            MSG. Mercury in fish. Blah blah blah. No evidence that any of it does anything to anyone.

            1. Careful Damon, you may make a point and incite aggressive reproach. The fact is there’s plenty of things we as a society are doing wrong, that “require worrying about”. We are facing the first generation that will not outlive the generation before it. Strange. I personally take everything I’m told and do some research for myself to get a better understanding of the pros and cons. There are arguments in support of diet and it’s influence on diabetes rates. Yet I can find articles that state “McDonald’s burger hailed cheapest, most nutritious food ever” Clearly there’s a lie in there somewhere. Diabetes rates are sky rocketing, and yet we’re still being told that we should “stop worrying”.

            2. I think “aggressive reproach” is what the Internet was secretly designed for :). Thanks, but I can handle anything that comes my way. I am “pro” vaccine, but “anti” know-it-all. There are too many people in both camps who claim they have all the answers. We are still in the dark ages of medicine in so many ways.To think we have all the answers and have mitigated all possible risk is hubris and, to my mind, naive. I believe in strong, scientific arguments, and so I appreciate when Skeptical Raptor, you, or anyone else provides useful studies. Comments like “MSG. Mercury in fish. Blah blah blah…” detract from a person’s credibility and shed light on potential hidden agendas, so I called the person out on it. How’s that for inciting aggressive reproach?

        2. Perhaps you should set down that book and read some actual scientific studies on the subject.

          If that doctor you cite was actually interested in the subject, he would be conducting studies, not writing books for profit.

          1. That kinda is a ridiculous statement. So, I’m to understand, then, that compiling, citing, and using research from others is useless? All that matters is research you conduct yourself? Oooookaaaay… Just in case you’re not aware, almost everything in his book is available for free on his website. So, maybe profit wasn’t his sole motive?

            1. Nope. Writing a text book is one thing. He did not write a text book. This book in not intended to be read by other qualified individuals or as a teaching tool in the instruction of such persons. His book is solely for profit to be soled to parents who don’t want to hear about the reality of vaccination. He also wrote “The Autism Book” geared toward parents, the fact that he has two books on subjects that are not scientifically linked and only linked through misinformation is not a coincidence.

            2. He has many books on many subjects. This in no way confirms he is out be against vaccines.

      2. Raptor, allow me to address your statements point by point:

        1. There is no evidence that aluminum is related to any neurological condition.

        ***Wrong, aluminum is a known neurotoxin. The question is varying sensitivities to aluminum of various body tissues, and whether or not the aluminum from vaccines can achieve said levels in those tissues.

        There are several studies linking aluminum to a wide array of neurological adverse events.

        Aluminium exposure from parenteral nutrition in preterm infants and later health outcomes during childhood and adolescence, Fewtrell et al is just one, but literature is replete with published evidence that aluminum is indeed a neurotoxin. Most intelligent vaccine proponents recognize this and simply argue that aluminum from vaccines does not reach levels in the body that are harmful (more on this as I go through your other points)

        2. Thiomersal was NEVER an adjuvant. It is an anti-fungal that prevented contamination in multi-use vials.

        ***Agreed, this was a misstatement by the initial respondent.

        3. Aluminum is an adjuvant, which enhances the immune response to the vaccine.

        ***True. However, the exact mechanism of action and scope of action in humans is not fully understood even by vaccine proponents. They pretty much know it elicits a pro-inflammatory chemokine response at the injection site, but beyond that they don’t really fully understand exactly how it works. Also, it is important to understand that these adjuvants (most commonly ALuminum Hydroxide (AP) and Aluminum Phosphate (AP) are formulated as anhydrous salts and are insoluble by design. They are intended to stay in the body for an extended period of time to exert their effects. (More on this as I go further on your points)

        4. The amount of aluminum in vaccines is measured in micrograms. If your child got every single vaccine recommended for year 1, they would receive around 4 mg of aluminum. A child can consume up to 1mg/kg/day, which, for a 10 kg one year old would mean that they were consuming 3000-3600 mg 750-900X the dose from vaccines.

        ***This is where we start to get into the principles of pharmacokinetics. It is all well and good to talk about dose and to make that dose sound miniscule. However, comparing the dose received via injection to that which is ingested orally is disingenuous (or just plain ignorant, depending on your actual knowledge of aluminum kinetics). You see, it is known that aluminum is absorbed at less than 1% through the GI tract. In fact, the most referenced study on GI absorption of aluminum is probably Greger et al, which pegged it at 0.78%, far lower than what has been demonstrated with injected aluminum. You would need to ingest quite a bit of aluminum orally to match the dose received through IM injection. I’d like to draw your attention to Flarend et al’s examination of aluminum kinetics in rabbits. (In vivo absorption of aluminium-containing vaccine adjuvants using 26Al,Flarend, 1997, Vaccine). We know from this study that only 6% of AH and 22% of AP are excreted over a 28 day period. This note will be important examining your next point.

        5. The aluminum salt used in vaccines is quickly cleared by the kidneys. So the tiny amount, versus what is consumed and inhaled, is simply not going to have any biological issue.

        Wrong. This is a flat out lie perpetuated by researchers who are either disingenuous or ignorant. The very studies that claim this (Mitkus et al’s review of Aluminum Pharmacokinetics for the FDA a few years back is the main one) also reference Flarend for some of their data, but conveniently ignore the low excretion rates flarend reported. There are a couple reasons for this low excretion rate. One, as I mentioned before, these adjuvants are insoluble. They remain largely intact at the injection site until they are solubilized by citrate ions in the interstitial fluid of the muscle tissue at the injection site. From there, however, the aluminum nanoparticles in the adjuvant are too large to be processed by the kidneys– as evidenced by the low excretion rates reported by Flarend. Further complicating matters is the fact that the dose used by Flarend was only 850mcg, whereas human infants can receive as much as 1225mcg at their 2 month visit, a dose 50% higher. The absorption kinetics of aluminum are non-linear, so making comparisons between the absorption of two different dose levels need to account for this difference in absorption kinetics. Further, Flarend used non-antigen bound aluminum adjuvant. We already know the aluminum nanoparticles in the adjuvant are too large to be processed by the kidneys, so one can expect when those particles are antigen bound, they will be larger and even less able to be cleared by the kidneys.

        A later study by Movsas et al attempted to look at blood and urine levels in infants post vaccination. A decent idea, only they complete misunderstand (I’m being kind) aluminum kinetics with regard to aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles. They measure urine levels at 12 hours and blood levels after 24 hours. This is ridiculous in the setting of what is known about aluminum kinetics from Flarend as mentioned above. I’ve written the authors to ask them to account for where the aluminum is at 12 hours and 24 hours if it is not in the blood. Focusing on blood levels is even a bit disingenuous, since the aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles are taken up by macrophages. Once in macrophages, these particles can easily cross the blood brain barrier.

        This study demonstrates that human macrophages do indeed take in aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles:http://www.nature.com/…/srep06287/full/srep06287.html

        This study demonstrates aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles are present in macrophages located at the site of vaccine injection in humans:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11522584

        This study demonstrated that aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles injected intramuscularly in mice were detected in the brain up to a year later:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/…/pdf/1741-7015-11-99.pdf

        6. We know what aluminum does to children at extremely low doses. NOTHING. Don’t invent a problem that simply does not exist.

        Can you please supply a RCT that specifically examines the effect of aluminum adjuvant at the doses currently delivered according to the standard US vaccination schedule that proves this? How about data on deposition of aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles in brain tissue as a result of vaccines? Mitkus cited two papers in its brief mention of the brain, neither had anything to do with aluminum adjuvant in vaccines. The absorption and excretion kinetics are markedly different between aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles and orally ingested aluminum which converts to ionic aluminum. The latter is processed by the kidneys, and at least 50% is excreted quickly. The same cannot be said for the latter. I challenge you to present published data to the contrary.

  17. The fair intelligent way to evaluate scientific claims is to fairly present all sides. Why should I listen to a partisan view of one scientific hypothesis, which is in effect claiming that this scientific camp is right and other scientific hypothesises are wrong, or don’t exist, or are so few that any dissenting view is not worth mentioning?

    Why the hell politicize scientific debate? A vaccination in and of its self might well be “safe.” That doesn’t address whether multiple vaccinations all given at the same time are equally safe, because of the faulty logic that one safe vaccine plus 5 safe vaccines must equal a safe single regimen of vaccines. Where’s you data and study on the interactions of multiple medicines.

    I just had a healthy, young cat die within two weeks of getting 3 vaccinations and a worm treatment. He checked out and was anemic from flea bites.

    Does that prove any one of the vaccinations were not safe? No, but then again the vet couldn’t tell me how 3 vaccinations, a particular worm treatment and a flea pill all interacted on an anemic cat. He was guessing, and instead of dividing up the medicine over a period time to adjust to the cat’s weakened state, preceded in a rush.

    So for a 100 dollar vet bill, I got a dead cat. Better than a dead child or an autistic child.

      1. The thing is raptor, is I have no children. On the other hand, in the future you might.

        So good for you. Vaccinate your kids. I always admire someone completely confident they are right.

        1. I have children you dumbass. Three beautiful daughters, all in college thanks to vaccines. They would have been dead or otherwise harmed by the diseases that vaccines would have prevented. You’re an idiot. Go back to high school, and get an education.

          By the way, I’m not right. I do have evidence that supports my statements. You have nothing, but shit.

          1. Skeptical Raptor, your last reply to qqqjones makes it very hard for others to take you seriously. You resorted to name calling and swearing, and then you made a statement that let others see that you mistakenly believe that anyone that isn’t vaccinated is going to get a disease. Nothing in your reply helps you to appear educated. Perhaps it is you that needs to go back to high school.

          2. Right and what diseases would your daughter’s have died from? I know many grown adults that were never vaccinated and never died from some disease in which there is a vaccine available. In fact, of all the people/children I know that have not been vaccinated, not a single one of them has fallen ill with a vaccine preventable disease!!! However, I do know one person that died as a direct result of a vaccine and several others that suffered severe side effects requiring hospitalization. A couple of them have life long complications as a result of the reaction to the vaccine! Your assumption that none of your daughters would have made it through life had you not had them vaccinated is ludicrous!!! Unless maybe you live in filth in a third world country!

      2. Google Swiss Pharmaceutical vaccination scandal

        You or anyone could start here:

        Seriously, this pro vaccination stance that somehow big money science is above corruption and pure as the driven snow is pretty laughable if someone has an Internet connection.

        If many people no longer trust science, its not because of science. Its because of the money making rackets which greatly mis-use science. And all your whinning about the teaching science and how ignorant someone is for not believing in science is just mis-direction.

      3. You have succeeded, with that comment, to lose me as a potential reader of the bullshit.

        In the future, if you want to gain some trust, and help parents who aren’t vaccinating to understand some reasons they are following might not be truthful, first and foremost, don’t call them idiots.

        Second of all, YOUR theories on whether small amounts of certain chemicals in vaccines are harmful to infants, are so far-reachingly wrong, that it pains me to think you have a forum with which to write. You didn’t even take into consideration that we aren’t using just the one vaccine each time, but the current vaccine schedule allows up to a dozen different vaccines to be given to a 2 month old, a 4 month old. Those kidneys you say will “clear it all out”, aren’t fully developed until the age of 2. That same dose we give that baby, we’ve somehow deemed an appropriate dose for an adult as well, on a lot of the vaccines.

        And your half life “lesson to everyone”, the fact that you say “it doesn’t build up”, “its outta there in like 1-2 days”.? Do you understand what a half life is? Half is out in that time, and the HALF of what is left is out that much time later, and so on and so forth. So could there be a build up? Absolutely.

        PLEASE, until you can write intelligently about the matter, just DON’T write at all. Your article was laughable, but more than that, it was filled with the same politically swayed crap we are currently hearing from the White House. Who funds YOUR Democratic point of view???

    1. I agree with you, no scientific aproach should be based on ridiculizing people who dont believe in the same things o putting other theories down to make ones sound the right one.
      I cannot take the writer seriously.
      This is not “scientific aproach”

      We are being told all the time how things are safe for us, to find out later on that the statistics were manipulated or new information is discovered that proofs the previous affirmation wrong.

      Not a good article.

  18. Let me tell you a story of one of my experiences that made me a cynic. My wife and I brought our daughter in to our GP for a scheduled check-up when she was a baby. The Dr. at this visit informed us she was due for her Chicken Pox vaccine. We had some questions for her regarding said vaccination. When we questioned the vaccine we were told that this vaccination is (and I quote) “Absolutely imperative”

    So we set into discussing the vaccine and its implications with our GP. In the U.S. in 1995 before the vaccine was administered there was 11,000 patients administered into hospital due to chicken pox. Now I would imagine those admissions would range in severity, and age of patient (which is important). 100 of the visits resulted in death. That is a 0.0041% chance that chicken pox could lead to potential hospitalization and a 0.000038% chance that it could lead to death. Seems low.

    Why take that chance at all you ask? Well lets look at the vaccine first. How long does it last? “Best guess is 10 years” she tells us (which coincided with our research) but there’s a booster coming out soon that they believe will get 20 years of immunity. So that suggests we will have an immune compromised population in their 20’s and beyond. Now lets discuss the effects of the Chicken Pox virus on adults. Are we all aware of the effects Chicken Pox has on adults?


    In healthy children, varicella is generally mild, with an itchy rash, malaise, and temperature up to 102°F for 2 to 3 days. Adults are at risk for more severe disease and have a higher incidence of complications.


    Chickenpox and pregnancy
    Other complications of chickenpox affect pregnant women. Chickenpox early in pregnancy can result in a variety of problems in a newborn, including low birth weight and birth defects, such as limb abnormalities. A greater threat to a baby occurs when the mother develops chickenpox in the week before birth. Then it can cause a serious, life-threatening infection in a newborn.

    Pregnant women you say? Such as those in their 20’s and beyond who now have no natural immunity? Birth defects? Death? Sounds like a ticking time bomb to me. Guess what our GP said at that time. And I quote. “Oh the jury’s still out on the Chicken Pox vaccine”. Seemed like quite the 180, in under 2 minutes.

    That day we switched GP’s, and started to do more research.

    Now I am of the belief that there’s not more than a handful of 20+ year olds that will have a vaccine booster alert programmed into their cell phones. Rather we will have a group of individuals preoccupied with education, new careers, and potentially starting families.

    The moral of the story? Are we not potentially over vaccinating? When you look back in history when humans have tried to change the course of nature, it has routinely come back to bite us in the ass. Look if you will at antibiotics. What a great thing it has done for the human race. Look at us now – over prescribing and it is losing its effectiveness. We have moved into the world of super bugs that antibiotics no longer manage. These are my concerns.

    1. Look–you made a reasoned post, and were quite polite with your former GP. In the course of 2 minutes, the GP was befuddled–bc most times, people follow orders like sheep and the white-coat is never questioned. –(No doubt this Raptor fellow will soon be cursing you out, and Im sorry for that)
      I have 5 children, the first 2 vaccinated to the hilt. Followed the recommendations to a T. They both were at the GP often–with ear aches, strep throat, you name it. Our insurance carrier at the time had the temerity to notify us they would refuse further payments to our GP for our one daughter bc she was there so much for the same thing!! I began researching and learned the #1 office for Ped’s is ear infections– and coincidentally, vaccine side effects include, you guessed it, ear infections.
      Upon notice of this fact, the insurance carrier quickly acquiesced from their position.
      Anyway, fast forward to the following 3 children. The next 2 were twin girls. Vaccinated up until 6 months old when we saw them BOTH react negatively to their last vaccine. Blank stares, among other side effects. Since then, no vaccines (and none for our 5th child)– and guess what? They dont even know their GP. They are rarely sick, and as youngsters (2-6yrs old), got over colds/sickness quickly. No asthma, no RSV, no constant runny sick, yellow/green mucus nose, no constant ear infections. The health outcome comparison from my little anecdotal study was/is pretty clear to us. Oh, and Raptor man, they are are well adjusted, happy kids who make all sorts of friends and attend school with Vaccine waivers. They compete and excel in sports, too. They are not Einsteins to be sure– but we expect that they will make lasting positive contributions to human society, just as we endeavor to do.

      1. I share in your sentiments MS. The flu kills up to 45,000 people a year, even with vaccines. Yet somehow when/if my children get the flu, they’re typically over it in a day, and it is accompanied by a mild fever if any for at most a few hours.

        I do not sit here and preach that vaccines work, or do not. I do not know. My perspective is that the immune system is such a delicate and complex system that really no human has even the scratched the surface. “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” ― Socrates

        I think this man; Dr Peter Fletcher, who was Chief Scientific Officer at the Department of Health in the UK said it best:

        “If claims of a causal link between the MMR vaccine and autism are finally proven”, Fletcher has said, “the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history,” and that without such research, health authorities cannot possibly rule out fears about MMR. “It is entirely possible that the immune systems of a small minority simply cannot cope with the challenge of the three live viruses in the MMR jab, and the ever-increasing vaccine load in general.”


        Yet there is no testing to ensure children are not compromised before injecting them with multiple strains. I read things like this quote from Dr. Fletcher, and think to myself, this is the man that has poured over all the “proof” that vaccines are safe, and yet he doesn’t think the testing is adequate. Something doesn’t add up to me. And hosts of pro vaccine forums such as Raptor, who used to market and sell pharmaceuticals preach about how ignorant and naive people are, yet those with the authority and knowledge are saying quite the opposite.

        When people drop all the “go to jail baby killer” rhetoric and start to engage in a proper conversation, then maybe we can get somewhere in this discussion. Until then the topic will only become more polarized.

  19. I completely support your conclusions, but I think there a couple of errors in the math. First, if the LD50 of thimersol is 5011 mg/kg as you say, then the LD50 for a for a 20 kg child would be 100 g, not 10 g. That represents 4 million doses of vaccine (not 400,000), but as a single dose, not 4 million doses a day for a year.

    A second problem with your argument is that you are using the LD50 and extrapolating to any kind of harm. There is no necessary connection between LD50 and harm in general. The LD50 describes the dose required to kill half the subjects with an acute dose, but there may be substantial risks with smaller doses through mechanisms that are unrelated to the those causing acute, fatal injury. For example, the LD50 of asbestos or plutonium might be fairly high, but that does not mean that much smaller doses are devoid of risk.

    As I said, I completely support the main point of your argument, which is that the minuscule amounts of these substances in vaccines are known to be safe. I just think that in making that point we need to make our analysis as denial-proof as possible.

    1. I’ll fix that error.

      LD50 is a good point because we simply cannot do experiments on children, despite the lies of the antivaccine lunatics. The fact is we don’t get close to 4 million doses. Moreover, toxicity is dependent upon dose-response, which isn’t some imaginary straight line from 0 to death. And we have that information based on numerous clinical trials.

      I fully understand LD50. But I clearly discussed dose response.

  20. Here’s another interesting piece of mathematical information. If you look at disease rates over a longer period of time, you’ll notice that they were steadily falling long before vaccines were introduced. Could better sanitation perhaps be a contributing factor to the decline of disease in developed countries? Here’s a great chart that sheds some interesting light.


    1. I don’t think anyone is claiming that the mass reduction in death rates in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was due to immunization. You are correct to suggest that sanitation (as well as improved nutrition) played a major role. The impact of immunization was a kind of second wave. If you study the kinds of diseases prevented by sanitation and by immunization, you will see that they are largely different, so both approaches were important in improving world health. For example, typhoid and cholera are diseases of poor sanitation, while measles and pertussis are unrelated to sanitation and can’t be reduced simply by improving the environment.

      1. Hey Mike, just curious if you listened to the link I posted below? You seem to be an open minded, educated individual and I’d be interested to hear your take on what Suzanne Humphries has to say. Here’s the link again in the event you missed it the first time.

          1. And your manners are somewhat lacking. I asked someone with intelligence and knowledge on the subject to refute the science so we could have a discussion. I didn’t ask for an ignoramus to bully me. Unfortunately with such retorts I fear you’ll perhaps lose some credit here Raptor, and be known as someone who backs their ideas with anger when they are challenged. Good work mate, you’ve won me over… I’m now a believer.

            So getting back to the topic at hand… and yes Raptor, I’m giving Mike, and I suppose yourself a chance to turn me into a believer. I have gone so far as to offer an argument and then requested that you challenge that argument with one of your own. Lets have a discussion about the very topic that you’ve started, or shall we just call it at “You win because you’re the bigger bully” and I’ll move on to a different, more open minded forum where perhaps someone can argue these points better than you?

            I’m looking for information…. can you provide it?

            1. Well that’s pretty typical. I’ve seen this debating tactic before. If you can’t win the argument, you attack character. I ask again, have either of you even listened to the entire audio clip? Lets talk about what she says, not what others say about her character.

            2. Dave – she’s a lunatic & doesn’t even understand basic scientific principles….I don’t take scientific advice from a woman who believes in “magic water.”

            3. Sorry, define “Magic Water”. And again I ask the question, did you listen to the entire clip?

            4. Ok ok I secede. Although I do strongly believe Suzanne Humphries has strayed from conventional medicine because she believes it to be failing us. I also believe she makes some very strong points in her interview that could be listened to and explored. But if you cannot see past her choices and listen to what she has to say then we should move on.

              Read this article of an interview with Dr Tetyana Obukhanych.
              She is a PhD Immunologist who echoes some of the sentiment of Dr. Suzanne Humphries. There are a few other articles by her and others, and some videos as well I could share.


              The point these people are trying to make is that we know so little about the immune system. We also keep seeing outbreaks of disease in immunized communities. As age goes up, so does the rate of infection. To say that immunization is the cure all end all I think is ignorant. Then when people challenge your stance it is met with anger and aggression (not you Lawrence, thanks for the level replies).

              Unfortunately the anti vaccine movement is relatively new, and not so unlike the French Resistance it is forced to meet in bars and back alleys. The money just simply isn’t there for the research and only now are prominent Dr’s. starting to step forward and speak out about the lack of science revolving around immunity and the immune system.

              I really do wish that people were given the right to chose without being chastised by the bigger, stronger movement. (insert French Resistance metaphor here).

            5. @Dave – #1 The anti-vaccine movement is not “new.” People were against the Smallpox vaccine because they believed it was going to turn them into a cow (so it is a couple of hundred years old at this point).

              After reading your link, the person being interviewed makes some very erroneous statements – such as the belief that the immunity conferred by vaccines is different than natural immunity, which is patently false.

              The breakdown of the “myths” propagated by this so-called “expert” can be found here:


              If you think the research “hasn’t be done” perhaps you should actually read the literature and go through the thousands of studies that have been conducted over the past 100 years……and stay away from notorious anti-vaccine websites for your information.

            6. That link was a good read Lawrence. Thank you very much for engaging this discussion and for having thought out responses. It is a difficult one to regurgitate for most, and trying to cut through the fat of this argument is a challenge.

              The comment section of that blog was full of good responses all the while holding back on the name calling and condemning people to jail or hell.

              Let me do some more reading on things as I still have more questions that I’d like answered and you seem good at providing the perspective I need.

              See Raptor? You don’t need to tell people they can’t read, and that they’re fucking twits, or that they should shut the fuck up and go to jail to win an argument. Don’t they say “Kill em with kindness”?

              Hope to chat more Lawrence.

            7. file:///C:/Users/student.LC15/Documents/En112/vaccines/The%20Case%20Against%20Immunizations%20-%20Doctors%20Speak%20-%20General%20Issues%20-%20About%20Vaccines%20-%20Vaccination%20Risk%20Awareness%20Network.html

            8. yes, and if only the “authority” Raptor is appealing to was always credible,

    2. There is a big problem with the graph you presented here : it is not on incidence rates (I suppose it is what you mean by “disease rate” ?).

      It’s on mortality rates. Meaning that, yes, as medical care advances, we have more means to keep sick people alive (and sanitation is part of this, since it helps prevent secondary infections). However, this type of graph doesn’t inform us about diseases complications.

      So it doesn’t really adress the original question : do vaccines have an effect on incidence rates ?

      Here is an article which explain this in more details : http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/vaccines-didnt-save-us-intellectual-dishonesty-at-its-most-naked/

      1. Yeah I’ve read all this in the past and have found all the same arguments. The CDC shows charts that start 15 years before vaccines were introduced in a number of occasions. Unfortunately (which is how the argument goes) this doesn’t really show a big enough picture. You’ll notice many of the anti vaccine perspective charts start anywhere from the 1850’s to the early 1900’s. That’s the argument they’re making, which your post doesn’t touch base on but only shows the CDC charts again.

        On the other hand he points out the direct link between nations vaccinating rates dropping and incident rates rising. He points out the direct correlation which to me seems quite valid.

        Good article, thanks.

        1. Ok, but what do these charts from the 1850’s talk about ? Mortality or incidence or morbidity ? That’s a pretty important detail.

    1. Interesting…..


      We included 90 reports containing 116 data sets; among these 69 were clinical trials of over 70,000 people, 27 were comparative cohort studies (about eight million people) and 20 were case-control studies (nearly 25,000 people).

      Key results

      The preventive effect of parenteral inactivated influenza vaccine on healthy adults is small: at least 40 people would need vaccination to avoid one ILI case (95% confidence interval (CI) 26 to 128) and 71 people would need vaccination to prevent one case of influenza (95% CI 64 to 80). Vaccination shows no appreciable effect on working days lost or hospitalisation.

      1. Yes, here is something else of interest from the Cochrane Database:

        Quality of the evidence

        The real impact
        of biases could not be determined for about 70% of the included studies
        (e.g. insufficient reporting details, very different scores among the
        items evaluated). About 20% of the included studies (mainly cohorts) had
        a high risk of bias. Just under 10% had good methodological quality.

    2. Tom Jefferson a biased, paid shill of the antivaccination cult. Seriously he, as opposed to the lies that most of us who are pro-science and pro-vaccine are Big Pharma Shills.

      Tom Jefferson is an incompetent researcher who had to hide in a mediocre Italian medical facility because he can’t get published. He filled his analysis with bias and eliminating data because it didn’t fit his pre-conceived conclusions.

      This is why you’re full of dumbassery, and a real skeptic, like me, kicks ass. Because I take nothing at face value.

      You’re too stupid and uneducated to actually critically analyze anything. So, STFU. Go away. Hope you end up in prison.

  21. Just one more thing…. and I know it’s a 30 minute audio file, but if you’re patient enough and are truly looking for an open minded argument, it’s a great listen. The key though is to listen to the whole thing….. and not just dismiss what is being said because it goes against what your GP tells you. There is ALWAYS two sides to every story. Please listen.

  22. Google “Vaccine Court” and you’ll find that there has actually been millions of dollars awarded to children who have suffered severe adverse effects due to vaccines in the U.S. alone. Most articles refer to side effects showing Autism like symptoms. I’d imagine the Drs and Judges that come to the conclusion of fault on behalf of the vaccine and its manufacturers would probably disagree with what is written in this article, and the oversimplified way it’s written. If you do some research into vaccines you will find that there is a very serious difference between having something floating in your blood stream, and injecting it directly into muscle (which is where most vaccines are administered). Direct injection into the muscle creates a much different response by your body then say eating a banana and obtaining said element orally. I think to sit here and compare apples to oranges and then say “See, told you so” is exactly the bad science that you are aiming to refute.

  23. If your kids are vaccinated, then why all the fear that an unvaccinated child is a threat? Are vaccines not effective, and if they are, is your child not protected? I’m a little confused by some of the outright fear and malice projected on this thread. Maybe we should let people have their own opinions and do what they feel right for their families?

    1. They are a threat to children too young to be vaccinated, you fucking twit. What’s that, you’re carrying poliomyelitis? Well, here, carry my two month old baby! After all, there’s no risk from unvaccinated morons carrying fatal diseases…

      1. ^^^^ Everything this person said. Dave, that is the whole point of this article. This isn’t an issue on opinions, these are facts. Doing what is right for families is literally laid out in front of you with scientific data to back it up.

        1. Yes but there is also another side to this story, which for some reason is not only ignored, but is met with anger and fear. Please read some of my other posts and we can talk about clear facts, if there are any in this argument.

      2. Yup. Hear that. But Poliomyelitis is only endemic in 3 countries in the world. So I’d say the odds of contracting that are basically slim to none. The Vaccine Court paid out millions in damages to hundreds of victims within a 3 month period in the U.S. alone! Two of those cases are for Autism. I guess if life is full of risk, and our role as a parent is to mitigate that risk for our children, then I’ll go with the 0 risk as oppose to the obvious and court recognized.

        That is hundreds of payouts in a three month period. Bear in mind those are the payouts. There’s is probably thousands more who have no made the connection between the vaccine and their childs issues, or have bought into the anger and fear perpetuated by articles such as this.

        But obviously I’m a fucking twit and have done no reading on the subject so what do I know?

      3. Alton Ochsner was so convinced that Jonas Salk’s vaccine was safe that he decided to publicly inoculate his own grandchildren with the vaccine in front of the faculty of Tulane Medical School. The result of this bold and courageous action was that his grandson died from polio and his granddaughter got polio.

        This happened in the 1950’s in New Orleans. Famous story. Though curiously forgotten in pro vaccination circles.

        Read that again. Ochsner killed his grandson and his granddaughter got polio. I can’t imagine living after doing this. But don’t tell me that aware people shouldn’t concern themselves about the dangers of vaccinations.

        There are books about this, including a best seller, Dr Mary’s Monkey.


    2. People are are not vaccinated for non-health related reasons endanger those who can’t be vaccinated – those who are too young, those who are allergic to the vaccinations’ ingredients, and those with compromised immune systems. People who have health/age related reasons for not receiving vaccines rely on ‘herd immunity’ of society around them. When people choose not to vaccinate for illogical reasons not based on facts, it endangers those people.

      1. Read my reply below. The fact of the matter is there is no such thing as non-health related reasons for not vaccinating. If the courts are paying out millions to children and their families for being effected by vaccines, then I’d say that’s a very solid health related reason to not vaccinate. We cannot argue with the fact that Dr’s, lawyers, and judges are siding with effected families and reimbursing them for the impact vaccines have made on their lives.

        Again my point is that parents should have the right to chose without being bullied by people who buy into everything their GP tells them.

  24. http://yournewswire.com/johns-hopkins-scientist-reveals-shocking-report-on-flu-vaccines/
    I find this post funny and arrogant. Major nail polish companies have removed formaldehyde from their products and yet you are trying to convince us through mathematics it’s safe. A FACT remains it’s not good for us. Fact…Autism has increased over the years. Unless you know for 100 percent certainty the cause. Your math skills will not convince me that we benefit from the vaccinations.

    1. Quit eating pears and apples. Shut down your liver after drinking. All of those things produce more formaldehyde than you could ever get from a vaccine.

      Do you really enjoy being an ignorant individual? Sad really.

  25. Some of these comments make me wish we had a minimum IQ requirement in order to use the internet. Knee-jerk populist anti-intellectualism is taking over.

  26. I actually sympathize with the anti-vaxxers to a point, since being a bunch of stupid social animals that can’t do anything for themselves, and have to band together just to survive, and being forced to exist in this world through birth and an instinctive fear of death that can only be removed through severe mental illness, being born unable to be given an informed decision on the subject of vaccines, being born an ignorant helpless creature, bossed around by people three times your size just because “it’s just the way it is.” And “we’ve been around longer therefore we’re allowed.” That all sucks, and ultimately they’re making a ill reasoned decision to try and give more freedom to choose to their kids. But the choices here are between forcing your kid to have a shot, and potentially forcing someone else’s kid to have some horrific disease. It’s shitty, but that’s because the world is big giant parasite that constantly feeds on itself as numerous lives suffer and die only to create the next generation of lives to suffer and die. Vaccines are almost always harmless so they clearly seem like the lesser evil here.

  27. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. No matter how educated, how thoughtful, how undeniably correct any information is, if someone chooses not to believe it, they won’t. I’m convinced at this point that anti-vaxxers will remain blinded by their own ignorance no matter what evidence is presented to them.

  28. Why is it the pro vaxxers are so often rude and say such hateful things to the people who disagree with them? I’m not anti vaccination but I find it disgusting how you people treat other parents who are just trying their best to research and make informed decisions in regards to their children’s healthcare. Calling people names and attacking them online simply makes you a bully and does nothing to help them see your point of view.

    1. It’s stated in the first part of the article. If you spoke to someone who confided in you that they routinely drove drunk through school zones, would you be upset with them, or would you respect their opinion that driving drunk was in fact beneficial to children? I’m inclined to think you’d probably have a few harsh words for them, and perhaps report them to the authorities. Again, it’s pretty simple: people who understand vaccination don’t behave that way because they are bullies who don’t respect others’ right to have a different opinion. They respond that way because anti-vaxxers’ ignorance is actually killing an increasing number of children every year. It’s dangerous, irresponsible, and it kills children. Pretty simple really. Nobody gets to have their opinion respected whose opinion is harming others. It’s just not a thing.

      1. I should be nicer. But anti-vaxxers are intentionally trying to harm children, more than just their own, but the whole community. They are narcissistic and lack an intellect that I think rational people have.

        I love the metaphor about drunk driving. I don’t particularly like drunk drivers either. 🙂

      2. Pretty simple really.

        Not at all. Introducing politically correctness to a scientific debate is scary as hell.

        So what if you are wrong, cowboy? What if down the road its discovered, that some chemical in a vaccine which was supposed to be safe, was not safe, because some contractor was substituting inferior ingredients to make a larger profit, and the purity inspectors weren’t doing their jobs?

        Now what? Now who is killing kids? You are.

        1. First: Don’t call me cowboy.

          What does “politically correctness” have to do with science? I’m so tired of being confused by the confusion of people who have no idea what’s happening around them. My analogy here has absolutely sweet FA to do with political correctness, but I guess if all you have is a hammer everything starts to look like a nail.

          “What if I’m wrong?” I’m confused by this as well. Have you ever heard of Ockham’s Razor? What you’ve done here is you’ve taken an actual, simple thing that’s happening and you’ve added so many unnecessary entities that it’s actually no longer what was being discussed. It’s actually a totally different thing now.

          To say nothing of the fact that it demonstrates that you have absolutely no idea how the vaccines discussed in the original post are made, or how they’re regulated. If the way they are made and regulated happened in a way where what you’re describing was even remotely possible, then *of course*, I would immediately concede that I, ‘cowboy’ that I am, might be mistaken.

          I’m probably not the first person to say this to you, and I’m pretty sure I won’t be the last: You really need some science education. That’s not political correctness, it’s just a simple request for you to acknowledge your innumeracy. ‘substituting inferior ingredients?’ ‘purity inspectors?’ What planet are you from?

          Yes. If you put poison in things because you have bad intentions based on a profit incentive, and if some train of bad things involving inspectors with, I dunno, Erlenmyer flasks and tubes and blue and red dyed liquids and bunsen burners (you know, science) happens, then sure, poison and all that. That’s not what’s happening here.

          What’s happening here is that actual kids are actually dying because perfectly safe, carefully tested vaccines aren’t being used by people who, like you, have no idea what they’re talking about.

          I didn’t have to make up some convoluted scheme in order to produce the current, fatal results. You had to make a cockamamie scheme up in order to pin imaginary future deaths on people who are doing hard work saving the children who are being vaccinated. Cowboy.

    2. Name calling and rudeness? Last I checked, pointing out solid facts is not being a big bad meanie. Maybe its not considered polite, but fact trumps opinion and even the “sensitive emotions” some people may have behind those opinions. Also, this is a lot nicer than some other reports, including those from the anti-vaccine side. They too have no problem insulting science proving their views wrong, slandering people on the autism spectrum (like me) and using us as pathetic dehumanized entities to support their idea that being “afflicted” with our brain type is worse than a completely preventable death (even though vaccines do not create our brain type). Plus, unlike this side of the argument, the anti-vaccine movement endangers the lives of innocent children. Personally, I think the life and well-being of a child out weighs an adult’s “sensitivity” about being called out on their ignorance.

      1. I went to an Autism march in a small rural town in the South. Must have been about 200 mothers there in a county of about 3,000 people.

        I walked around and talked to the different mothers with autistic children. Nearly everyone said their child was developing normally until the child got vaccinated.

        So what is going on? When I grew up, I never met an autistic child. Now its what? Its epidemic. So why? You pro vaccinations don’t know. You are just positive it has nothing to do with vaccinations, when all the direct anecdotal evidence from mothers suggest indeed it is the vaccinations or something which has been added over the years to vaccinations or the increased number of vaccinations.

        1. Anecdotal evidence is *not* evidence. It is not ‘epidemic’ (if it were, the word you’re looking for is ‘endemic,’ by the way). What you need to do is, instead of looking at anecdotal evidence, which is not used for a reason (not the least reasons being small selection size, selection bias, and availability heuristic), you need to examine the careful controlled studies that have been done. They have all concluded that (while it *can* seem that way when you examine things anecdotally, which doesn’t give reliable results, for heaven’s sake), there is no more autism among vaccinated kids than unvaccinated kids. Anti-vaxxers keep asking *why*. Well, the only reliable way to find out *why* is to do careful, scientific studies. The studies are being done all the time, and they disprove what you want to hear.

          It seems to me, when you say ‘you pro-vaxxers don’t know,’ what you’re really saying is, ‘the scientific community refuses to provide me with the answer I want and keeps instead coming up with the facts, which I disagree with because they don’t hew to what I want to hear.’ Eventually, you’re going to have to realize that kids are dying, that we developed vaccines for a reason, and that you don’t understand how any of this works.

          If you’re seeing a rural community with a high incidence of autism, then the first thing you need to do is find out what the numbers really are. You can’t do that ‘anecdotally’. You have to survey the community. You have to examine the facts. You have to find out if that incidence is higher than the general population. Then, you have to eliminate variables. You’ve decided that it’s vaccines, but if this community is in fact experiencing higher than average rates of autism, you have to control for a whole range of things that might be causing that. What you’re doing is unscientific. That doesn’t mean ‘it’s not respectful to something I hold dear.’ ‘Unscientific’ means that it isn’t going to work. The only way you’ll find out what it actually happening is by being rigorous about your investigation. Otherwise, if you come to the right conclusion, it will be by *blind luck* and you won’t know why with any certainty.

          You also have to be ready to discover that, despite how worked up you got, and despite how concerned you were, you might have been wrong in the first place and the results might show that the rates are normal (though still sad and unfortunate), or that the causes were not what you expected.

          This is the humility demanded of people who want to know what’s really going on. You don’t wade into a community of motivated, well-meaning, capable people generating results through careful examination of processes and go ‘you don’t know what’s going on’. They’ll admit a margin for error (though they’ll likely be able to tell you what it is within a certain degree of accuracy), and then they’ll explain to you what’s happening, and if you’re not acting with rigor and care in your examination, you might make the mistake of dismissing what they’re saying because it doesn’t support your assumptions. That’s what’s getting kids killed right now.

          1. Anecdotal evidence is *not* evidence.

            Perhaps not. But the young mothers I talked to are not in the science business. They are in the mothering business.
            They know first, that there is one chance in 65 births that their child will be born autistic.

            Second, most understand that autism was virtually non existent a few decades
            ago. Autism rates in 1970 were around one in 25,000

            So essentially your argument is we don’t know why autism rates have gone up so drastically in the last 40 years. But we don’t have enough evidence to conclude it has anything to do with vaccinations, their formulations, purity or expanded use, etc.

            But we are working on it.

            The problem is while you are working on it, babies are still being born at
            an alarming rate with autism. So in the midst of medicine’s complete
            failure to either discover the cause of autism, or cure it. Its hardly
            surprising that prospective mothers are erroring on the side of caution
            in regard to vaccinations.

            Especially since big pharm company are no longer legally responsible for their products and no one is going to ever give one of those mothers of an autistic child a 2 million dollar
            check for care, and damages.

            You should learn empathy for people when you have no skin in the game. If you believe what you say about vaccinations and you are a prospective parent and know from the get go
            that there is a 1in 65 chance you child will be born autistic and caring for that child will forever alter your life, then go for it. Then you have skin in the game.

            1. This is infuriating. You either disn’t read what I said, or you didn’t understand it. You simply cannot jump to conclusions. There is absolutely no evidence that vaccines are causing autism, but overwhelming evidence that not vaccinating children is killing more than just the kids that aren’t getting vaccinated. This is whatvis happening. You simply can’t make the argument that in order to be compassionate to parents who have an irrational fear of vaccines, you must, to be nice to them, jump to the parently false conclusion that vaccines are a cause, and that not vaccinating doesn’t have real, immediate, often fatal consequences. It’s infuriating that you would argue that in all seriousness. Everything else you wrote was, if that’s possible, even more inane. It’s not even worth responding to this claptrap.

            2. You can be infuriated all you want. The fact is the third largest cause of death in the US is doctor and health care system fuck ups.

              Sorry, if i pissed on your entitlement to be treated like an infalliable god because you have a science degree. Let’s look at these examples.

              12,000 deaths per year due to
              unnecessary surgery

              7000 deaths per year due to medication errors in hospitals

              20,000 deaths per year due to other
              errors in hospitals

              80,000 deaths per
              year due to infections in hospitals

              106,000 deaths per year due to negative effects of drugs

              What does that tell anyone with an ounce of common sense? It tells them to be responsible for their own health, diet and exercise, and avoid like your life depended on it, any unnecessary medication, surgery or visits to a hospital.

              Because your overworked and too busy to give a shit doctors will likely kill your ass following standard, accepted protocol and then seek protection for his professional fuck ups from an army of attorneys and insurance companies.

              But you will still be dead. Dead is like forever.

              That is why people don’t trust information on vaccinations, because the health care business is still a business and if you take health care advise and it kills you, you are just a statistic.

            3. This is some deeply flawed and deeply paranoid thinking. It’s time for a little remedial instruction before I opt out of this conversation. The longer this goes on without any potential for resolution, the less and less I want to play pigeon chess.

              First mistake you’re making here is in assumptions. You don’t know the first thing about me, about what ‘privilege’ might or might not be ‘pissed on’ be people not treating my explanations with the basic respect a reasonable argument deserves. You don’t know what degree(s) I might or might not have. You don’t know if I have ‘skin in the game.’ You don’t know what motivates me to argue with random paranoids on the internet (aside from, in this case, the idea that changing one mind might save lives). You have, in fact, not the slightest idea who I am, but you’ve assumed a lot of things, and as a result you’re arguing with a straw man you’ve propped up to aim your bizarre, paranoid (and as far as anti-vaccine positions go, dangerous) opinions at.

              Science is, at its root, simply a toolset. It’s not a conspiracy of elitists, a bloc of superior, self-righteous jerks who won’t let you in unless you speak their language. It’s just a word for a certain kind of mental discipline; you don’t jump to conclusions, and you’re very careful about how you gather information, and about how you carry out things that you (and the giants whose shoulders you’re standing on) have decided are procedures that work.

              That said, yeah, there are a lot of people who are bad at it. Human beings are flawed, often deeply so. Bureaucracies and systems get complicated and can sometimes make it harder to do things well. Also, many people are jerks.

              What you’re doing by quoting malpractice statistics (presumably from the US?) at me is pointing out a basic, simply assumption that a reasonable person makes about science and medicine: like any field of human endeavour, it takes care to get it right. Some people are better at things than others, and yes, you do have to guide your own health to a great extent. You have to be capable of using careful decision making to navigate a complex system.

              For my part, I think what you’re talking about there simply goes without saying. I and the rest of the reasonable people assume it as the state of affairs we have to live in and go from there, working with others to improve it where we can. What I don’t do is throw the baby out with the bathwater, because if you reject it, and then you decide that ‘science’ (you and I don’t mean the same thing when we use that word.) is just a bunch of elitists telling hapless people what to do, then you don’t have the toolset for arriving at reality that it offers.

              It doesn’t *matter* that mothers aren’t ‘in the science business,’ though that’s a puzzling thing to say, because they are. You went from there into a scientific analysis (a sloppy one based on false assumptions, but bad science is still science) of what those mothers are thinking and why they choose a flawed and dangerous course from the data they have. I say it doesn’t matter, because when you want to find out what’s *actually* happening, there’s very limited room for assumptions, anecdotes, jumping to conclusions, or appeasing the feelings of people who would pressure you to base a decision based on bad information they’ve put together because they don’t know what’s going on. The costs in the long term are *higher* if you get it wrong.

              If you assume (as you have) that it’s vaccines, you miss the real causes (which are actually almost entirely historical misclassification, reclassification, misdiagnosis, greater recognition of symptoms as the profile of the spectrum rises, and the increased reporting that has come with the recent, dramatic changes in the medical field and in the media). It’s *dangerous* to do this.

              Science is often hard. It often requires specialized knowledge. It often goes awry, and many people do it badly. Unfortunately, if you throw the baby out with the bathwater and assume it’s all fucked, then you get that right back, because using it isn’t perfect, but it’s better than the alternative, which is no better than random guessing.

              What you’re advocating here is going into a dark room to find something and then refusing to use the flashlight you’re carrying. Sure, the flashlight doesn’t show you the whole room, it just casts a beam, so you might still stub your toe. But you can’t blame that on the flashlight, because if you turn it off, you’re going to walk into walls.

              Anyway, I’m out. There’s no discussion here. Just another paranoid who, unlike a moon-landing denier or a UFO believer, is actually not harmless like they are, because lives stand in the balance when it comes to medical technology, but isn’t any more capable of seeing other points of view. Sad.

            4. ROTF! Oh, you can really stretch credulity.

              Its stands to reason, if you are arguing from authority without giving a fair hearing for all sides of the question, that your position is partisan.

              Unfortunately for people who argue from authority, the internet now has near instant counter points from scientists ready to argue that vaccinations are not all medicine pretends they are.

              So why should I argue with a malcontent on the internet, when these credentialed scientists and doctors are more than willing to make my case, with no strain on my part, and you clearly avoiding the debate?

            5. Just wanted to say I appreciate your patience and reasoning skills. You seem like you would be a great teacher.

        2. Wow, 200 mothers at one autism walk claim their kids were completely normal before vaccinations and you “never met” anyone with autism when you were a kid so vaccines must cause it, really? Aside from the fact that this is not a study thus not actual evidence and 200 is a pretty small sample size for making such claims; your arguments are flawed. For starters, development is varied before age 18 months to 3 years so there is no firm “normal development”, especially that which could easily pinpoint autism, to follow, just estimates for a some of the major developmental milestones that many on the autism spectrum easily meet. Most of the development before this time is also not social development which is where our core deficits are. Also, these same kind of “anecdotal evidence” you get from the claims of mothers blaming vaccines is the same as from mothers who didn’t vaccinate their kids and also have autistic kids. The age where the symptoms of autism become apparent is the same in both vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, and with the same rates of seemingly normal development before this and/or regression reported in both population (if vaccines were the cause this would not be found equally in unvaccinated groups as the vaccinated groups). Then there is your claim that you never met anyone with autism when you were a kid. It is quite possible that you did know people with autism but were not aware of it. Most of the increase is in the higher and extremely low ends of the spectrum who largely went undiagnosed for decades. Many of the new high functioning cases are even adults who were just seen as shy or eccentric growing up. Then there was the false belief that if you were autistic you could have no comorbidities (which are very common) so many were not diagnosed because they were epileptic, had mild MR, were dyslexic or any number of things (many adults were re-diagnosed in the past 20 years because they now know this to be false so that too adds to the increase). There is also the way disorders have been treated. It is only relatively recently that they were “seen” except in rare cases. Most families hide that their were anyone disabled in their family; this was especially true of mental and/or neurological disorders. Autism was especially hidden if it could be because of the stigma against the family, particularly the mother, which dominated views on Autism through the 1980s. This was largely fueled by Bettlehiem’s misuse of terms taken out of context from Kanner’s work and of outdated Freudian theory while rejecting any scientific evidence countering his views (he would even engage in personal attacks against any who disagreed with him about Autism not being caused by maternal abuse/neglect which dominated the autism field for decades. Some of this even continues to linger today. Thus, it should come as no surprise that many people would hide a diagnosis, not seek one if they recognized any of the signs or refuse to acknowledge one because they knew that they weren’t abusive/neglectful and thus believed it wasn’t possible to have an autistic child. Not as many doctors could identify the disorder as today and if the child was high enough functioning to pass as “normal” just a bit odd, they didn’t seek diagnostic testing for them too often. The increase itself is also an issue. To date there have been no incidence studies done for ASDs (to officially chart an increase fully accurately one needs to compare incidence studies form different times) and prevalence studies only go back to maybe the 1980s (which is where the estimated increase rates come from) before that they just assumed it had to be rare and guessed possible rates. In the cases of the estimated rates of increase from the start of prevalence studies their does appear to be a clear rise in diagnosis (which is not necessarily the same thing as an increase in cases). Most of this can be accounted for with better diagnosis and such and the margin of error could easily account for the rest. There are other things that have a similar increase rate profile (like men who where baseball caps) that clearly are not a cause, so there is no reason to assume that the increase in vaccines (whose rates actually differ from those of the estimated rise in autism) do either. Co-existence does not prove causation. I know Autism is not caused by vaccines because there have been hundreds of scientific studies of hundreds of thousands of children which prove it doesn’t. I believe the science, by those trained in science, over the opinions of mothers who have an emotional need to blame something for their child’s brain type (and I’m not dissing mothers here nor their emotional ties to their children; this is a normal response) as to potential causes and things that are not causes. Further, there is far more evidence to the fact that vaccines do NOT cause autism, than there is anecdotal evidence (which is by definition an unreliable source of evidence anyway) suggesting a causative link between autism an vaccines. These are facts and they outweigh opinion.

          1. I know Autism is not caused by vaccines because there have been hundreds
            of scientific studies of hundreds of thousands of children which prove
            it doesn’t.

            100’s of studies? Really? Somehow I doubt this.

            So lets get this straight. You are not a medical doctor, not a scientist, but believe in science.

            So if I found actual medical doctors and degreed scientists that are making the case for a link between autism and vacinnations, I’d would be listening to people who are more qualified than you to make this assessment?

            Hmmm . . wouldn’t that make an interesting debate. A pasionate layperson and a degreed professional arguing about vacinnations.

            1. If you doubt it look it up. I would expect nothing less. If you found medical doctors that believed in this link I would listen to their reseach and check it along with that of doctors who don’t. (You will need to dig pretty hard to find medical doctors, autism researchers, psychiatrists etc. who support the anti-vax conspiracy on vaccines causing autism. Research soundly negates it; so, most people with a medical license oppose the view. You do have Dr. Wakefield but his paper was revoked for fraud and ethics concerns and his medical license suspended. Yes, I’ve read his paper, before it was proven to be fraudulent, and it does not take an “expert” to realize its crap, especially when you start checking the footnotes.) I’ve already read the literature from both sides of the argument as is required for proper research, but am always checking up on the latest autism research whenever I have the chance to do so. And, while none of my degrees are in medicine, I am more studied than an average lay person in this area. I’m a part of the autistic community and have done a lot of study in this field. I’ve also taken quite a few classes in it and attended workshops and seminars on the topic. {Just a few month back I had the opportunity to attend one of Dr. Attwood’s workshops (he is one of the leading experts on my brain-type in the world). But I degress here.} I just do so for personal interests not as a career goal. I do not want to be a medical doctor nor a neurologist or psychologist. Of course I “believe” in science. I “believe” facts. Science isn’t a matter of faith or belief, its a matter of what evidence supports. As for a debate, I wouldn’t even need to be involved since there are a
              plethora of more qualified individuals who would logically be consulted
              for such a thing. {And by more qualified I mean actual doctors and neurologists who specialize in this, not random moms at a random autism walk who have no background in either vaccines or autism but have fallen under the common logical fallacy that co-existence and causation are the same and were duped by the anti-vaccine crowd preying on their emotional need for answers.}

    3. YOU, as an antivaccine parent, are intentionally causing harm of your own children and others. Shall I treat such narcissism and abuse with civility?

      No. Maybe if you came here and said “I’m confused about the lies the anti-vaxxers are saying, can someone help me?”

      But instead, you buy into their lies and ignorance. You’re not even putting an effort into opening your mind, and just whine about how you and your cult are treated.

      Please, go troll someplace else. You’re not a “loving mom”. You want to harm children.

      1. I have to say, this raptor dude is a douche. His/her douchiness stems from his/her lonliness, quite clearly, by his/her high and mighty attitude. He/she sits at his computer pantsless and looks for people to put down in order to feel superior to others.

        1. His blog, his rules. No one is making you read it. And I don’t blame him if he’s getting sick of the anti-vaxx trolls. Their sheer arrogance in believing that they know more than doctors, simply because they have internet access is truly breathtaking and mind-blowing.

            1. By all means vaccinate your child. Oh, that’s right. You don’t have any children.

        2. It’s pretty cold right now, so if I were pants-less, I’d be freezing.

          I don’t feel superior. I sit on the moral and scientific high-ground, and you feel inferior because you’re incapable of reaching that same high ground. It takes education and critical thinking skills, which you sorely lack. But I do appreciate your pop-pseudo-psychology. You must have read that while in prison?

      2. I don’t think it’s fair to say intentionally causing harm. Antivaccine parent’s ignorance is causing harm to others, but it’s unlikely that’s their intention.
        Also, why did you call this commenter an antivaccine parent? They said right there in their comment “I’m not anti vaccination”. They were just criticizing the hostile responses.
        As frustrating as it might be to act with restraint, they have a point. It’s not going to work with everyone, but it’s much more likely that people will reconsider their views if you talk to them in a respectful way. Vlad’s comment above is a great example of an effective way to respond to an ignorant comment.

    4. It’s not just pro-vaxxers. A lot of anti-vaxxers are JUST as rude and often resort to ad hominem attacks simply when we ask for evidence of what they are saying. And just because they know someone’s sister’s uncles barber’s cousin’s roommate who was supposedly ‘vaccine injured’ they think that that is proof that vaccines are harmful, when there is plenty of science to the contrary.

      I’ve been called a shill. A child-abusing rapist (yes someone ACTUALLY said that me vaccinating my child was a form of rape), etc etc etc.

      I try to always be respectful when pointing out the flaws in someone’s argument, but when they repeatedly refuse to acknowledge the science and that they have no real logical argument they then often stoop to calling me a shill and saying that the science I provide is not acceptable because it has all been ‘paid for’ by the almighty “Big Pharma”.

      Also they then quote sites like mercola and I’m sorry, but he lives in a 2 million dollar house courtesy of the people who buy his ‘natural remedies’ (which I add do NOT have any peer reviewed science to back up whether or not they work, plus he has been under investigation for making claims about his products that have been proven fraudulent).

      So I’m sorry, but just because anti-vaxxers have an ‘opinion’ that does NOT give them the rights to spout misinformation and quackery in lieu of actual research done by actual scientists. Just because they can google, does not make them informed. It makes them self-righteous and selfish because they KNOWINGLY put not only their child in harm’s way, but other children and vulnerable members of the community as well. And I’m sorry, but to me that is unthinkable. No man is an island, everything we do has repercussions and not vaccinating is one that can have the biggest.

    5. I agree. It’s probably most likely a combination of people being frustrated with others’ ignorance, frustration that that ignorance is potentially causing suffering to others and harm to society, that making a short snide remark takes much less work than thoughtfully writing an articulate response (such as Vlad’s), and sadly, because for some people it simply feels good to put down those they don’t agree with.

  29. Could you anti-vaxxers PLEASE stop using “Big Pharma” as an argument? Why is it that pharmaceutical companies are made out to be villains if they make money? EVERY business is in business to make money. Why is making money okay, say, in the case of growing organic vegetables, but not in making medications and vaccines that save lives, every day? If you actually look at the revenue that pharmaceutical companies make (and you can, if they are public companies – they have to produce annual reports with financials) and understand what a small part of their revenue that vaccine production makes up, you’d realize that argument is bunk.

    1. Exactly. What these anti-vax zealots don’t seem to grasp is that if there were NO profit in vaccines, then the US pharmaceutical companies would stop manufacturing them, and we’d be forced to buy vaccines from China or India.

  30. This article is admitting to there being toxins in these vaccinations..
    Yeah, let’s ignore the fact we are injecting ourselves with things we shouldn’t, no problem, it’s all in the math…

    How does a mercury derivative make me healthy, and benefit our bodies?? How does formaldehyde benefit me if I inject myself or my child?? Sure, you can say it’s not harmful, but can you prove that we NEED it? Most people get more sick after being vaccinated…and enough people have grown up perfectly healthy, without vaccinations. My son wasn’t vaccinated as a baby, and he was never sick, compared to other kids who were sick all the time. He is smarter than any kid I know, and shows no signs of autism, or any other social/cognitive abnormality that I tend to see in other kids. There’s my proof first hand.

    We are stuck in a cycle of needing toxic chemicals to fight off unnatural viruses that are caused by OUR unnatural lifestyles. There has got to be a better way to prevent disease, and a better way to treat disease, than pumping people full of random harmful shit that may or may not work, and will most likely have adverse affects before being effective. I’d like to see the evidence that all these chemicals in our vaccinations are necessary and beneficial, before you start telling us not to worry about them due to your so called “math”.

    We all have a right to know and understand exactly everything in these vaccinations, and yet hardly anybody understands them at all.

    1. Have you ever bought bread at the grocery store and fed it
      to your child? It contains formaldehyde.
      The vegetables you feed your child are coated in poison and altered in
      their very genes. Have you ever taken your child to Subway? You have fed your
      child the same ingredients that are in the yoga mat you exercise on. Has your child ever had a pop? A piece of
      gum? Every day we feed our kids poison, years ago we didn’t know that, now
      every trip to the grocery store we stock up on food we know is modified past what
      our grandmothers would recognize as food. We bring that crud home and feed it
      to our families. Why? Because to avoid that we must either grow all our own
      food, mill our own flour, make our own bread and cheese and raise meat animals
      to slaughter ourselves or get up early on Saturday to go to the farmers market
      and take the time to get to know the folks who do all of that. We would have to
      spend our time and our money backing our position. Most people don’t. By
      contrast refusing to vaccinate a child requires no extra effort. In fact it
      means not having to go to the effort of keeping on top of the vaccine schedule
      or driving to the doctor to get the vaccination. I am not surprised that so
      many people choose to make a stand in the way that inconveniences them the
      least while blithely ignoring doing anything about the issues that require them
      to actually do something. What angers me is that while changing your shopping/eating
      habits has repercussions mostly for you and yours, refusing to vaccinate your
      child affects us all. We are seeing the effects of vaccine denial in the re-emergence
      of illness we thought we had beaten. So
      thank you to all those who take easy route to the high road, congratulating
      themselves the whole way. Thank you for your hypocrisy in endangering everyone
      else so you could feed your own image of yourself as a parent who cares without
      actually having to do anything positive.

    2. Do you have selective reading or are you just really dumb? How can you possibly read that article and walk away with “HA! THEY ADMITTED VACCINES ARE DANGEROUS!”. You already know exactly what is in the vaccines. What the fuck do you think the ingredients label is for?

      I legitimately feel sorry for your children.

    3. “We all have a right to know and understand exactly everything in these
      vaccinations, and yet hardly anybody understands them at all.”

      Really? REALLY? You think nobody understands them at all? I understand everything in these vaccinations *because I actually read the article.* Apparently you didn’t.

      Just because you don’t understand doesn’t mean no one else understands.

    4. You are a moron. I just re-read your idiotic screed, and I’m embarrassed for you. And I’m embarrassed OF you. That you are THAT stupid and ignorant is a sad commentary on our educational system.

      You’re disgusting.

    5. Instead of calling you an idiot, let’s look at each point you make individually.

      “How does a mercury derivative make me healthy, and benefit our bodies?” —>That’s a bit of a straw man, especially if you read the article (perhaps you did not). No one and especially not the author is suggesting that thimerosal is inherently going to make you healthy. Its purpose is to maintain the intended antigen in isolation without risking exposure to real pathogens. You know that but try to frame the argument in a way that supports your pre-formed views. The point of the article is that the dose is quite small and has been shown to be non-toxic in humans.

      “How does formaldehyde benefit me if I inject myself or my child?” —>Another straw man, and a moot one at that. Have you eaten an apple in your life? A banana? Almost any fruit, meat or dairy product? Then you’ve consumed or fed to your child a detectable amount of formaldehyde. This is naturally occurring, and would be present at the same levels in organic produce. You don’t complain about this because you would never know. However you want to discredit vaccination so you bring it up, but ignore the fact that there is many times less formaldehyde (practically none!) in a vaccine that you take once than in common everyday foods.

      “Most people get more sick after being vaccinated”–> You are pretty veritably wrong here. You wouldn’t cite anything for the first statement because you are making it up. Unless you mean sick as in the literal intended mechanism of vaccination, where the immune system adapts to an antigen incapable of true infection. The purpose of a vaccine is to prevent someone from getting truly sick- so where are you getting that information?

      “..and enough people have grown up perfectly healthy, without vaccinations.” –> Millions, perhaps billions of people died from preventable illness while those people you talk about just got lucky. This statement is insensitive to anyone who died of an illness that could have been prevented by a vaccine. Just because some people avoided being infected doesn’t mean that everyone doesn’t deserve to be protected.

      “My son wasn’t vaccinated as a baby, and he was never sick, compared to other kids who were sick all the time. He is smarter than any kid I know, and shows no signs of autism, or any other social/cognitive abnormality that I tend to see in other kids. There’s my proof first hand.” —> So you’re using one subjective and personal case to refute statistics dealing with millions of people. Face it- you just don’t want to believe it. Your son not getting sick is not evidence that vaccines are somehow bad. Guess what, I’ll never get polio. But your son could right now if vaccines had never existed. Boom. Proof they’re good. Next, are you seriously insinuating that every child other than yours is showing autistic signs? You nor I are qualified to make that diagnosis, and even if you were you’ll find the same proportion of autistic children in the non-vaccinated population as in the normal. Your sample size is tiny and your conclusions aren’t really valid.

      “We are stuck in a cycle of needing toxic chemicals to fight off unnatural viruses that are caused by OUR unnatural lifestyles.”—> Viruses are natural forms of life just like us. They’ve existed for longer than humans and are no affected by our lifestyles- unless you mean when we eradicate them with modern medicine. You pretty much just assume that anything “unnatural” – the definition of which you don’t even understand- is automatically bad. Did you know that part of the human genome is made up of the remnants of viruses that infected us? Viruses are anything but unnatural.

      “There has got to be a better way to prevent disease, and a better way to treat disease, than pumping people full of random harmful shit that may or may not work, and will most likely have adverse affects before being effective.” –> Again acting like we are gambling with modern medicine. The first thing you must to do even test a drug or vaccine on humans is to show that it is absolutely safe. It is not likely that a vaccine will have adverse effects and it is very likely that it will be effective. As a scientist, I hate to burst your bubble but there is not a better way to treat disease. I wish we could just eat an herb to prevent disease but the truth is if you want to go natural, you might die of tuberculosis. I’m pretty satisfied with the fact that again, I don’t have polio. And neither does anyone else. Seriously if you had your way people would be stricken with polio right now.

      “I’d like to see the evidence that all these chemicals in our vaccinations are necessary and beneficial, before you start telling us not to worry about them due to your so called “math”.” –> No you wouldn’t. You just read exactly what you asked for. Millions of doses of vaccines have been administered for many years and these chemicals have been very neccesary for them to work. Many people have been saved from illness due to these chemicals. You need to admit that you are just going to ignore proof from here on out because you have it. It just doesn’t fit the narrative that you already believe in. Also, the only people that put quotations around math are those that are afraid of it. No math here is questionable and it does not deserve to be treated like its some illegitimate rationale when you just don’t agree with it.

      And finally: “We all have a right to know and understand exactly everything in these vaccinations, and yet hardly anybody understands them at all.” –> You’re right that we have this right, but you’re wrong that nobody understands it. What you mean is you don’t understand it. And therefore you’re afraid. Just because you or your friends have never taken the time to educate yourselves does not mean that no one else has. I understand them. Doctors understand them.

      My final point, one more time. Without vaccines, people would still have polio and other terrible diseases. Without them, your child would have a great chance of being crippled or dead, because they’d still be around. Instead of being frightened of things you don’t understand, I encourage you to try to learn more. Please don’t erase the positive strides we’ve made towards eradicating human disease.

    6. How long have vaccines been used? Cause it would seem to me that we have survived despite your ‘warnings of doom and gloom and the world will come to an end”. In fact the worlds population has only increased – how is this possible if we are injected with poison and killing ourselves. History is also full of VERY smart people who have been vaccinated yet you are still arguing the fact?

      There has also never been verifiable proof that vaccines cause autism – please post this verified scientific proof that shows this.

    7. you are insane, go to a third world country and say that to someone who has no access to vaccines and people are dying of preventable diseases, they would ask for that vaccine in a heartbeat. And by not vaccinating your child you are putting other immune compromised children and pregnant women, etc at risk. Your child gets one of these diseases and then you need the cure which HELLO is probably fully of big names you can’t understand. When your child gets one of these diseases and you have to take them into emerge the nurse is going to look at you like you are from space and say ‘um didn’t you know you could prevent this’ Do some research, and keep your kids away from mine

    8. I can prove you need it. Without these vaccines, thousands of kids died every year from these diseases. Now, only a few hundred do- and that is up dramatically from before the anti-vax tide.

    9. Did you even read the article. These ingredients can be toxic in high (extremely high) doses. They are harmless in tiny doses. So is salt, so is water which is something our bodies need but too much in one setting and you can die(look up dilutional hyponatremia). A mercury dirivitive is not the same as mercury (of which their are different types not all of them threatening to us in small doses) in fact mercury is a naturally occurring compound in our bodies, as is formaldehyde, in much higher levels than the thimersol used in vaccine (now only found in flu shots, which are not required for most of the population and there is a thimersol free version, it cost more, if that’s really such a big deal to you) and the trace amounts of formaldehyde which may still be in the vaccines after their purification. It is used to sanitize the vaccine so you don’t inject live viruses and/or bacteria into the patient thus making them sick. So yeah, its safe because of math. Mathematics isn’t some scary voodoo curse, I don’t particularly enjoy the subject, but it is important and does in fact have relevance here. Yes, we have the right to understand whats in vaccines and why. And this article even explains some of that. Thimersol is a preservative so that multiple doses can be manufactured at once and distributed as they can be held for longer periods. Because people hear the word mercury and assume its poison, doesn’t mean it is. There are different types of mercury and not all of them are inherently harmful, some are relitively benign. A dirivitive of mercury, thus is not neccessarily harmful. And, since its no longer used (except in one vaccine which has an alternative that doesn’t use it and you don’t have to get it) should not be an issue anymore. At least not if facts actually matter to you. Just because YOU are not capable of understanding these facts or about vaccination in general doesn’t mean others don’t know it. Where is your “proof” that “hardly anyone” understands vaccines? I know a lot of people who understand vaccination. If “hardly anyone” understand, logically shouldn’t that mean I wouldn’t be able to know very many people who do understand it? And as for your claims that “most people get sick” after vaccination, or that most kids who are vaccinated are sick a lot? Do you know most people on the planet who are vaccinated and personally survey them? Where are you getting this information from? I know its not from actual statistics because every actual report on adverse side effects from vaccines indicated that such side effects are rare, less than 1%. And, where are you getting these stats proving most kids are sickly. Most children I know and know of are actually quiet healthy and resilient. Your experience with your son isn’t “proof” of anything, at most it would be one case study if it weren’t your son (the emotional ties between families creates a bias so your report alone wouldn’t count toward any kind of study). Also, since hundreds of studies on thousands of children (and I’m actually under-playing the numbers) have already proven that vaccine do NOT cause autism, your son’s lack of autism has absolutly no bearing on this topic. It literally proves nothing. My 2 siblings don’t have autism, display any autistic symptoms nor have any cognitive nor social abnormality; they are neurotypicals, perfectly healthy, social, and with no cognitive deficits. They were vaccinated. Vaccines did them absolutly no harm. I am autistic, like everyone else on the spectrum, I was born autistic. I vaccinated too, and like my siblings suffered no harm from it. My immune system is strong, I heal fast, and was rarely sick as a child. As for my cognitive abilities, I’m highly intelligent. Further, I feel no shame about my brain type, so metaphorically speaking, you can take your faulty opinions about my brain type (autism) and shove them up your pretentious @$$. Lastly, the diseases vaccines prevent are natural. We didn’t create them, and they have existed long before humans even had a full understanding of the germs, much less the ability to manipulate them. Vaccines were created to prevent these diseases and are the most effective way to do so. Those are verifiable facts, unlike the nonsense you’re spouting. Why don’t you actually do some research? Maybe then you wouldn’t have a problem understanding vaccines.

        1. Sorry about that. I’ve been having trouble typing comments with paragraph breaks; I end up accidentally deleting the post or submitting the unfinished one instead of inserting a black space. So, I tend to just type them as one long stream, especially if I’m typing fast (motor coordination issues) since that increases these incidents.

    10. THere’s toxins in fruit too. But it is the dose that is important. The amount of formaldehyde in a vaccine is 1000x less than the amount of formaldehyde normally found in the blood.

      Mercury derivatives don’t make us healthy; they are a tiny part of a few vaccines. However, the dose is so small to be almost none-existent, and below any value that has been shown to be harmful.

      People do grow up perfectly healthy without getting vaccines; they are also more lilely to die from vaccine-preventable diseases. The hypothesis that vaccines cause autism has been ruled out.

      Our bodies respond to millions of different antigens (molecules that cause an immune response) every day. We normally get exposed to different bacteria. The number of antigens that we get from vaccines is extremely small than the number we get from bacteria and visuses elsewhere, like from cuts and scrapes and in our food.

      The ingredients of the vaccines are listed on the labels and available not he web. From your argument, it seems clear that you don’t understand much, however.

    11. “Your so called “math”.”??!! No. Math is not fictional. It does not require quotations or the words ‘so called’ in front of it.

      If you would like to see evidence regarding vaccines, I suggest you do some research (from reputable websites and actual doctors, not whackjob conspiracy sites and anecdotes from your friendly neighbourhood anti-vaccine mommy group).

      I sincerely hope by your comments about “unnatural lifestyles” that you aren’t suggesting “eating clean” or whatever as a preventative measure against polio, rubella, measles, pertussis, etc. These, and a host of other diseases, had been completely eradicated in first world countries before the completely discredited Dr. Wakefield published his highly falsified findings about the correlation between vaccines and autism. Not eating processed foods isn’t going to prevent you from contracting whooping cough. Sorry.

      It is absolutely beyond shameful in this day and age that there are children dying from diseases that scientists spent their lives creating a cure for. Absolutely shameful. I firmly believe that this little bit of history is going to be looked back on with disdain and embarrassment by future generations.

    12. Your ‘proof’ is one anecdotal case. That isn’t the basis for any scientific argument. (But if you want, here is an anecdotal article about why you should be vaccinated. http://www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2014/01/growing_up_unvaccinated_a_healthy_lifestyle_couldn_t_prevent_many_childhood.html) If you need more anecdotal evidence, I’m sure you can talk to someone from older generations who remembers how bad polio and all these other preventable diseases truly are.

      And the reason your son was never sick has nothing to do with the vaccines. The only reason your son didn’t truly get sick with some awful, communicable disease is that everyone else around him was vaccinated. If you remove that barrier, especially from kids with compromised immune systems, these diseases can, will, and are making a come back.

      Skeptical Raptor’s math is showing you how minuscule the totals of these ‘toxins’ are. You and your children already have millions of times more of them already in your body than any vaccine will add. They’re there whether you like it or not as a natural byproduct of our metabolism and environment.

  31. The flu vaccine will only work on the flu strain it was designed for. The producers GUESS which strain they THINK might show up and as yet after 28 years they have FAILED to guess correctly which means the millions upon millions of flu vaccine doses given out had absolutely no power to protect but incidentally did kill a million people due to fatal side effects..
    Why would I take an injection of a vaccine that could kill me but can’t prevent flu unless someone guessed the strain correctly?

    1. Please tell me where your got your statistic that 1 million people died as a result of getting the flu shot? And you need to do more research on how often the flu shot actually did cover the flu it was designed for~~The scientists have not been wrong often~~H1N1 is one of the few things not covered and they came out with that vaccine very quickly. If I am correct, and I know I am, more died from the flu itself than ever from the vaccine~~You need to do a lot more research before making the statements you have.

      1. dbb got that from pulledoutofddbb’sass.com. Similar sources are available on request from “nut-jobs and wackaloons anonymous.”

      2. I’m not taking a stand either way but, FYI, my son in the military received a flu shot with H1N1 a few years ago. The shot was given in October, he was diagnosed (through a lab) with H1N1 the following January. He pulled through, but said he had never felt so sick in his life.

        1. When a case like this appears, it’s important to remember that a vaccine is a boost to your own immune system. It tells your body what an intruder looks like and gives it practice on how to defeat it.

          In most cases, this prevents people from getting sick because their immune system is now practiced enough to fight off whatever pathogen it’s facing. It’s like a teaching method for your immune system.

          The only inherent problem with this is your immune system itself. The vaccine can’t stop the “bugs”, as people call them, from entering your body. It can only give you an advantage in fighting them off before they make you sick. If you get enough of a pathogen in you, or if your immune system weakens, you can still get sick.

          I’m sorry to hear that your son caught H1N1. I know it can be a rough bug to catch, and I’m glad he’s doing better. That being said, the reasons he got sick may not have been related to the failure of a vaccine, as our own bodies and the conditions around us can greatly impact our bodies’ ability to fight off pathogens.

    2. Here here. SO many people are so sure of things they know very little about. How do I know they know very little about it? Because the people making the vaccines can’t explain why they don’t always work. NHL star Cory Perry recently got the mumps, even though he had the mumps vaccine as a kid. In my experience, most pro-vaccers are aggressive bullies in other aspects of life as well, and always tend to follow the leader, while most anti-vaccers have been taken too many times in other areas of life and are done with believing people and jump on the opportunity to have a say in their own life. See how this perpetuates the argument? Douch bag pro vaccers telling anti vaccers they are dumb, anti vaccers have been duped before so think that the pro vaccers are full of shit. To all you parents out there that are so afraid that a kid who didn’t get vaccinated will harm your new born or someone with a compromised immune system, what steps are you taking to avoid child obesity or mental health? I’d say focus on those two things and you’ll be fine, forget the anti vaccers.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.