"Mercury: How can I hurt thee? Let me count the ways..."

Well said, JenB! We can say the same about aluminum, polysorbate 80, and triton 100.

Aluminum: How can I hurt thee? Let me count the ways...

From the article titled “Vaccination Toxicity, Infection and Science” by Professor Frank Hartman.

http://www.vaclib.org/news/poxadverse.htm

“In summation: infection whether by vaccine or other disease agents lowers zeta potential causing clots. In a person with high zeta potential of the blood, it may cause only local reduction and aggravation. In other cases, it can result in micro capillary clotting destroying or impairing organ function or death. This accounts for the wide range of mental and emotional disorders as well as physical reactions since the site of the clot is unpredictable. The effect of the injection may start out as only an adhesion and through further reduction of zeta potential may change to a clot or hemorrhage. A simple change to a single vaccine at a time later in life not at birth, eliminating aluminum salts and monitoring of the blood vessels of the white of the eyes for intravascular coagulation would greatly reduce risks of vaccinations. However due to environment and aluminum accumulations, zeta potential tends to reduce with age. Thus vaccinations of the elderly or those with severe intravascular coagulation may reduce zeta potential close to the phase change point so that even an emotional upset can trigger a clot. Skin reactions can occur immediately and continue for seven or eight years or may not appear until one to six years later. The reason for the delayed effect is beyond the scope of this paper but also is a function of zeta potential.”

cmo, Since the genes for autism code for glutamate synapses, and glutamate was added to the MMR vaccine after 1982, you can't say that a gene for autism eliminates vaccines. The genes for autism actually make a vaccine ingredient link to autism MORE likely.

Now that the drug for Alzheimer's - called Memantine is showing promise - you practically have a smoking gun - Memantine acts as a GLUTAMATE blocker. Couple that with the fact that GFCF diets help some children with autism and these two food ingredients are processed and contain elevated amounts of - you guessed it - GLUTAMATE, I'd say we have VERY strong evidence that we need to investigate vaccines with glutamate added. Which means ALL of the live virus vaccines - especially the MMR which caused the fuss in the first place.

And if you think a single amino acid can't cause brain damage - just ask the parent of a child with PKU - who will get brain damage unless they limit the amino acid phenylalanine before the age of 7. The only treatment is diet. And they wouldn't be able to put THAT amino acid into a vaccine without a major warning label like they do on foods containing it.

I'm not sure I really see any shift here, except perhaps the use of the word "emergency." This will mainly allow the CDC to claim for the next five years that they are working on said "emergency," and continue to not find anything with study designs that can't really be used to answer such questions, while compiling a list of reasons why vaccinated vs. never-vaccinated studies are not feasible nor RELIABLE.

"The plan also seeks to deternine if the mercury-based preservative thimerosal is associated with increased risk for 'clinically important tics or Tourette syndrome.' (My note--I wonder how injured you have to be to reach the level of 'clinically important?') The CDC cited one study (Thompson, NEJM, 2007), which 'found that increasing exposure to mercury from birth to age 7 months was associated with motor and phonic tics in boys,' and added that 'an association between exposure to thimerosal and tics was found in two earlier studies (Andrews, Pediatrics, 2004; Verstraeten, Pediatrics, 2003).'"

Do they need more studies to warrant eliminating exposure to vaccine mercury? This indicates to me, approaching a decade later, that they probably now think they have a study design model that will succeed in not finding any link these conditions as well.

The problem here is that the CDC is the recruiting grounds for scientists who end up taking lucrative positions at vaccine manufacturers such as Merck, Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline, among others. Most notably of those who took positions with vaccine manufacturers are Dr. Julie Gerberding, who was the CDC Director during the GW Bush administration and Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, who was the lead author in the 2004 Pediatrics study designed to obfuscate the link between thimerosal containing vaccines and autism.

This represents a gross, personal conflict of interest. The public needs to understand, scientists at the CDC National Immunization Program are inundated with employment advertisements from vaccine manufacturers. I'm sorry; this agency will never, ever admit any causal relationship between autism and vaccines. These studies will constitute another layer of indemnification, at the expense of wonderful, special, vaccine-injured children.

Another attempt to kick the can down the road a few more years and give the illusion they are being objective when in reality they have no intention of admitting the vaccine/autism connection. The Hannah Poling case already settled this issue.

Heard it before...will believe it if I actually see it being done honestly, fairly and impartially.......

A comment from Sheldon over at H-Post

he has his own blog for bozos .... www.sheldo­n101blog.b­logspot.co­m

Autism is a strongly genetic condition. It does have some environmen­tal factor, but those occur before birth. The view amongst experts, with some dissension­, is that events after a child is born do not cause autism. This, of course, pretty much eliminates vaccines.

Mercury poisoning does not resemble autism. Measles virus in the brain does not cause anything similar to autism. So the two great ideas of how vaccines could cause autism were non-starte­rs.

Despite all this, a lot of work was done to study the relationsh­ip between vaccines and autism.The results, as expected, were that vaccines do not cause autism.

But vaccinatio­n opponents who blame autism simply ignore the above. They call for more studies, but of course, they pre-emptiv­ely reject any with results that they disagree with this.

My personal, non-commer­cial blog has moved to www.sheldo­n101blog.b­logspot.co­m.

But then a lot of work was still done and proved what what was already known --- that vaccines doe

I can't quite decide if this is legit or not.

It MIGHT be legit--after all, the Supreme Court has now made it clear that nobody can sue the pharmaceutical industry or the doctors for vaccine-induced damage, NO MATTER WHAT.And if Big Pharm just raised the price of anti-labor drugs by a gazillion percent, they can raise the price of vaccines by just as much to cover the upcoming costs in vaccine court.

But I'm afraid it's much more likely to be yet another smoke-and-mirrors game.

Myopia has to do with an abnormally shaped eyeball. I would not blame vaccines for that problem.

Regardless of the trustworthiness of the CDC, all 46 pages of the CDC agenda discuss trying to reduce adverse reactions to one cause and one reaction; biology is not that simple, and medicine will never treat complex illnesses as long as it clings to that paradigm. The only glimmer of hope was this, near the end:

'NVAC endorsed the Writing Group’s recommendation for an external expert committee to offer guidance on the feasibility of conducting such studies and additional studies related to the immunization schedule, including studies that may indicate if multiple vaccinations increase risk for immune system disorders. Although this was not part of its initial draft research agenda, ISO will work with NVPO to convene such an expert external committee.'

Jeff C., I couldn't agree more.

"with the addition of yearly-mercury filled flu shots - if they do carry out a study of fully vaccinated vs. never-vaccinated - damage will be more than evident."

As long as the research is honest I agree.

In addition to more autism, adhd, immune disorders, allergies and asthma in the vax'ed population of kids, I think there will also be more migraines and more myopia than exists in unvaxed kids.

My friend's son began getting severe migraines after his kindergarten boosters. And using my own experience with a bad tetanus shot in jr. high that hurt for months at the injection site, I soon began having migraine headaches with severe visual disturbances too. And that also coincides with the time I got glasses for nearsightedness.

Speaking of glasses, in my daughter's 3rd grade class of 21 students, 7 wear glasses!

When I was a kid there were about 2 kids per grade with about 6 classes per grade that wore glasses.

The anecdotal rate of 1-in-3 kids needing glasses is insanely epidemic. And I bet the annual flu shots with the mega dose of mercury are contributing in a huge way to this problem.

Like everybody else, I've been watching commentary about the nuclear disaster in Japan. And though I know they've been sent by a corporate crisis management entity, my fears are eased by this procession of middle-aged men telling me that Chernobyl wasn't that bad, radiation isn't that bad, because I want to believe that. But as with vaccines, the hand is overplayed; Ann Coulter is brought in and she says that only thirty-odd people died from the Chernobyl disaster and furthermore, a few good whacks of radiation actually prevent cancer. Now where have we heard that kind of thing before? The study purporting to show that thimerosal has a protective effect on the brain comes to mind (and now I'm really worried because I no longer believe *any* of the bromides I'm hearing about radiation).

Anyway, I found an interview with John Gofman. He has cautionary words about DOE and the corruption of research. That's my tie-in with Kirby's post. I fear that the new vaccine studies will be manipulated by corporate and government interests. How can we prevent that?

I like my posts short and sweet. This one isn't. Here's John Gofman on the subject of the corruption of one particular database.

Q: Could you describe your work regarding the retroactive tampering with databases?

Gofman: For years I've tried to believe that what was going on in Hiroshima-Nagasaki in what was called the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission --subsequently renamed the Radiation Effects Research Foundation-- was the only place where we had a huge body of data that addressed the question of what happens to people who have been exposed to varying doses. If there is an event like Chernobyl, or Hiroshima, we have to insist on the sacred meaning of collecting an honest database concerning what happens to people -- A. doing the very best job of determining what dose they got, and B. doing a follow-up study that is beyond reproach. That is an obligation to humanity that is virtually sacred. If you do anything less than the best in that kind of endeavor, you're a scoundrel. So all this time I wanted to believe in the work that was being done in the Hiroshima Nagasaki stuidies. In 1986, because of some questions about what the neutron dose was relative to the other forms of radiation --gamma rays, primarily-- they did a revision of the doses. Now I don't have any objection to the revision of doses, provided that you obey the cardinal rules of medical research. The first cardinal rule of medical research is: never, but never change the input data once you know what the follow-up shows. So because they had this idea of changing the doses, they didn't just change the doses, they shuffled all the people from one dose category to another, with a new dose. So there was no continuity with everything that had been done up to 1986.

Q: Who's 'they?'

Gofman: The Radiation Effects Research Foundation in Japan. The director is Itsuzo Shigematsu. The associate director is a guy by the name of Jupe Thiessen who's from the DOE. It's a DOE-sponsored endeavor --DOE and the Japanese Ministry of Health. There couldn't be a worse set of sponsors.

Q: The Japanese have the same kind of commitment to nuclear energy?

Gofman: Absolutely. So I said, "You can't do this. You want a new dosage, keep the new groupings and just assign the new dose and study [the results]." I call that "constant cohort, dual dosimetry." So I wrote a letter to Shigematsu and said "This is a violation of the cardinal rules of research. There is a way to do this correctly, and you can keep changing doses all your life, provided you just stick them alongside what you've done originally." Shigematsu's reply is on my book. [Radiation-Induced Cancer from Low-Dose Exposure, 1990] It's simple. He said, "Trust us." Well, the reason for the cardinal rule of research is, nobody ever has to say "Trust me." Because you set things up with blinding, with appropriate procedures, so that your data base is immaculate. You don't go changing things and say, "Well we did it objectively." I said, "Report in the old way --the old dosage-- and the new way." They said, "We won't do that. But we'll consider it. And we will give you the data in the old way for three more years." What's the shape of the cancer curve with the latest data from Hiroshima-Nagasaki? If I use the old data, it's like this (diagonal line). What's the shape of the curve with their new dosimetry? It's like this (slowly rising line that then goes up abruptly).

Q: Making it look as if the low-level of radiation is acceptable?

Gofman: Exactly. Their ultimate goal is fulfilled.

http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner01022008.html

barbaraj

don't worry. with the addition of yearly-mercury filled flu shots - if they do carry out a study of fully vaccinated vs. never-vaccinated - damage will be more than evident.

if anything it would show that there is a whole lot more going on than just mercury.....its aluminum, so-called safe purified peanut oils, animal retroviruses....kids today are being damaged at the same or worse rate than those born in the 1990s. You can see it in the elementary schools... kids are still going under in record numbers.

“And, noting that the IACC federal autism panel "suggested several studies including vaccinated versus unvaccinated children to determine if there are differences in health outcomes," the CDC said it will convene an "external expert committee to offer guidance on the feasibility of conducting such studies and additional studies related to the immunization schedule, including studies that may indicate if multiple vaccinations increase risk for immune system disorders." ”

The IACC had best not take any guidance from the CDC. The CDC position on the vaccine schedules is completely conflicted. The CDC has become nothing more than a surrogate or proxy for pharma in this nightmare of vaccine epidemics.

“Autism has become a "national health emergency," the federal panel added.”

Amen to that! Time is of the essence.

Is it safe now? I just wonder if that question is associated with these efforts. While ,of course, it's wonderful to consider all of this and begin the studies, where will the children of that most dangerous decade + 2, those children born between 1990-2002, fit into this? Will the most heavily poisoned of all be ignored? I can only wonder if the removal of most thimerosal brings us to a time when the studies will fail to show the huge impact vaccines had on the developing brains of those born during those years.
Impact on health? That should be not so difficult as that continues with current vaccines. I hope beyond hope that this study takes at least one birth year, smack in the middle, like 1996, and compares those vaccinated children to like unvaccinated children. No tricks, PLEASE, like adding in 1999's that were spared the birth hep, oh ..it's so hard to trust.