Tear By Dr. Larry Rosen

It's too crazy not to be true.  The state of Minnesota proudly announced this week it has passed legislation to ban mercury in makeup, while a bill to ban thimerosal (ethyl mercury) in children's vaccines in the same states lies in limbo.

According to THIS AP report: "The quest for thicker lashes and defined eyes should get safer in Minnesota on Jan. 1, when a state law banning mercury from mascara, eye liners and skin-lightening creams takes effect.  Minnesota apparently is the first state in the nation to ban intentionally added mercury in cosmetics, giving it a tougher standard than the federal government."

The arguments used to ban trace amounts of mercury in cosmetics? "Mercury does cause neurological damage to people even in tiny quantities," said Sen. John Marty, the Democrat from Roseville who sponsored the ban. "Every source of mercury adds to it. We wanted to make sure it wasn't here."

Hmmm ... that sounds vaguely familiar.  Where have we heard that?  Oh, that's right - it's what we've been saying for years about mercury in kids' vaccines; and some (most of the current flu vaccine supply for example) contain much more than "tiny quantities."
Is there something special about the type or amount of mercury in cosmetics that makes it more crucial to ban versus a biological product injected into babies and children?

According to Carl Herbrandson, a toxicologist with the state Health Department quoted in the AP story, "Mercury is bad, basically in all forms that get into the body."
You could vomit from the hypocrisy.
Dr. Rosen is a pediatrician in Northern New Jersey and medical adviser to the Deidre Imus Environmental Center. He blogs at, where this article first appeared.


Tim Kasemodel

Sandy wrote: "Although I cannot confirm the veracity of this email, here is what I just received concerning the governor's willingness to consider a mercury vaccines bill"

I can confirm this - I made the call. Gov. Pawlenty had a very long and "conditional" answer, I believe based on his lack of understanding - he used the word BAN which is not what our bill would do. I believe he thought his answer was based on his thinking that a multi dose mercury preserved flu vaccine is the only "viable option". He did not fully understand the down and dirty of our bill.

Too many other states Health Departments have bypassed these bans by declaring an emergency - not enough mercury free vacs available to meet demand. Our bill makes it so that is not necessary - they simply have to explain to every pregnant woman, mother and little old lady that a vaccine contains mercury. Some may not care, but I think the end result would be more people demanding mercury free vaccines and a new questioning of the intellegence of anyone who would defend this barbaric use of mercury.

Sandy Gottstein

Although I cannot confirm the veracity of this email, here is what I just received concerning the governor's willingness to consider a mercury vaccines bill:


On Friday December 14th Governor Pawlenty responded to a question on his weekly radio show on WCCO AM 830 regarding mercury in vaccines. When asked if he would sign a bill setting a preference for mercury free vaccines, he stated “….. yes, we would support banning those in Minnesota or in vaccines, assuming we could get replacement vaccines quickly available.”

Fortunately there are mercury free versions for nearly every vaccine. HF 1917 and SF 1780, Preference for Mercury Free Vaccines, does not ban vaccines containing mercury, but sets a preference. It requires providers to give the mercury-free version if it is available. If that is not available, they may give a vaccine with mercury after informing the patient or parent that the vaccine contains mercury. Considering that this leaves open the ability of providers to give mercury-containing vaccines along with informed consent, availability of mercury-free versions is not a problem, and the Governor’s remarks indicate that he supports this important legislation.

The Governor needs to hear how many people care about this issue. Please contact the governor and thank him for his comments on WCCO, and express your own support for mercury free vaccines!

To Contact Governor Pawlenty:
PHONE: 651-296-3391
TOLL FREE: 1-800-657-3717
FAX: 651-296-2089
EMAIL: [email protected]

All the best, Sandy

Heather O

Common sense would tell you that injecting mercury into people is more dangerous than applying it to their eye lashes, but when it comes to vaccines, common sense flies out the window. I’ve been working on passing the bills in Minnesota for several years now, and it just makes me ill every “flu season” to think of the pregnant women and infants who are unnecessarily getting injected with mercury because our state Health Department and pharmaceutical funded groups lobby and testify against the bills.


Sen. John Marty, toxicologist Carl Herbrandson, and state employee John Gilkeson all have received information on Thimerosal's toxicity. I live in Minnesota -- I tried. Their inaction speaks louder than their words. Apparently they are content to write off a percentage of the population as vaccine roadkill.

Sandy Gottstein

I'm not sure mercury was removed from pet vaccines because of any lack of clout. I think it may be that veterinarians, who usually become veterinarians because they love animals, didn't want the mercury in pet vaccines and didn't support their continued use. Many of the concerns we have about human vaccines are being addressed by veterinarians re: animal vaccines, like cancer and impairment of the immune system. Contrast that with the apparent lack of genuine concern by most pediatricians.

Kelli Ann Davis

Eye’d recognize that perfectly applied mascara and eyeliner anywhere!

Eye’d also venture to guess that she survived her date-with-destiny in the pic about 10 stories back?

Seems all is well in the” land of make believe” (or Minnesota in this case).

Tim Kasemodel

I (and many other wonderful people) am working to pass HF 1917 and SF 1780, "Preference for Mercury Free Vaccines" here in Minnesota. Senator Marty is Chair of the Senate Health Policy Committee and a strong supporter of our bill. It is in the House that we have been held up.

The groups that worked on the mercury in products legislation (the new law includes more than just mascara) did not want to include thimerosal because they thought it would not pass if they did.

While they had the best of intentions, I believe they have greatly misplaced priorities and missed a great opportunity.

Last Friday I called into the governor's weekly radio show and pointed out the hypocracy of the MDH supporting the removal of mercury yet STRONGLY AND CONSISTENTLY opposing our thimerosal legislation. His response was typical "give them what they want to hear" but he left me with the line he would "rely on the Department of Health and the CDC" for their advice.......

God help us all....


Actually, it's very easy to understand. The drug cartels have many people in their pockets with the resources to buy many more. Politicians, medical associations and the like. Here is something you may already know and then again you may not. Back in the early 90's the thimerasol preservatives that was put in animal vaccines was removed.

So obviously the make-up and pet vaccine industry don't have the clout to suppress doing the right thing.



Eye'll never understand.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)