• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Two Anti-vax questions

Wildy

Adelaidean
Wildy
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
11,977
Location
Australia
Briefly, I've managed to find myself in a couple of discussions with anti-vaccination people and I've run into a couple of problems.

The first is how exactly did science determine how much thimerosal a human could ingest before being killed? Is it extrapolated from animal testing or is it based on something else that I've managed to miss. Although it's basically the demand from the opposition, it's managed to pique my interest now as well.

The second involves an "epidemic".

I use the term in commas because the only sources I can find on it are places like whale.to (and sites that copy this one verbatim).

Essentially some bloke is saying that before WWI the US government vaccinated the people on the Philippines and then smallpox came and killed more people because of the vaccination. As far as I can tell this doesn't seem to exist beyond the imaginations of anti-vaccination people. Am I wrong here?
 
Well, a thurough knowledge of chemistry and physiology would allow one to extrapolate the safe levels of thimerosal. Especially knowing exactly how small amounts react. Since ETHYL-mercury is easy to measure in how it leaves the body, it is clear that it doesn't build up like METHY-mercury. Of course, most anti-vax pro-disease nutters can't pass basic chemistry, so the distinction is lost on them... And that's that scary science stuff.

As for the epidemic, smallpox is a unique case. It CAN cause the infection if the vaccine is a live variety (such as pre-WWI would most likely be). Although I haven't personally heard of that story, it is actually possible. Did it happen? I haven't researched that.
 
Aepervius said:
Seeing it here : http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/TH/thimerosal.html it seems it was tested on rat, mouse, but IAL-CHD LDLO 60 mg kg-1/4w-i is puzzling as it seems to indicate somebody published the lowest toxicity found on a 4 week old child intra aural lethal dose toxicity...
Click to expand...

It's OK because they use foreign children for those tests. :duck:

Seriously, they make estimates based on the rat and mouse studies and knowledge about human physiology.

That may not be an answer that would satisfy an anti-vaxer though.

(Obviously we're not getting anywhere near the lethal dose anyway.)
 
The smallpox vaccine is a live virus (Vaccinia virus), it is NOT the smallpox virus (Variola). So it can not can not cause the smallpox disease.
 
I think the oral polio vaccine is a live one, and can pass polio on - something about changing nappies springs to mind. In places where polio is rare, it has been replaced by the less effective inactivated vaccine. In places where polio still occurs more often, they stick with the more effective live one.
 
LarianLeQuella said:
Of course, most anti-vax pro-disease nutters can't pass basic chemistry, so the distinction is lost on them... And that's that scary science stuff.

As for the epidemic, smallpox is a unique case. It CAN cause the infection if the vaccine is a live variety (such as pre-WWI would most likely be). Although I haven't personally heard of that story, it is actually possible. Did it happen? I haven't researched that.
Click to expand...

Glad you said 'most'. I'm moderately anti-vax (for things I consider unnecessary - but that's a whole other discussion) and I have an Honours Degree in Chemistry ;).

As for the smallpox one, another poster has pointed out that it's a different 'live' virus in the vaccine but it's not unique in being a live variety. The polio vaccine is also (or at least used to be) a live variety as you are usually told to avoid handling your kids poo for a period of time afterwards and (although I think this last bit was probably an over-precaution) not to take them swimming in case it generated 'genuine' cases of infection.

Interestingly, when we questioned this at the time, it was admitted that, in our part of the world at least, an unvaccinated child (or adult) was more likely to contract polio from a vaccinated child than from 'the wild' - which was rather ironic.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
I think the oral polio vaccine is a live one, and can pass polio on - something about changing nappies springs to mind. In places where polio is rare, it has been replaced by the less effective inactivated vaccine. In places where polio still occurs more often, they stick with the more effective live one.
Click to expand...

Damn my slow typing fingers! Yes I think it may have been replaced here now but when we had our first child they were still using the live one.
 
The live oral polio (Sabin vaccine) reverts very quickly to wild type on passage through the gut and can infect unvaccinated individuals.

And the MMR is a live virus vaccine, as is the yellow fever vaccine, as is the chicken pox vaccine.
 
Last edited:
Didn't the smallpox "vaccine" of many ages ago include a sort of live virus? I thought I recalled that during the early 1800s they would try to intentionally give people a mild case of the pox in the hopes of creating immunity (using Cow Pox). I am unaware of what the procedure was in WW I though.

Again, my knowledge of the history in this is lacking.

And yes, I used "most" and generally I am fighting against the likes of Jenny McCarthy who think that vaccines containe fetal tissue, rat droppings, and a whole host of other outlandish claims (especially how they frame them).
 
LarianLeQuella said:
Didn't the smallpox "vaccine" of many ages ago include a sort of live virus? I thought I recalled that during the early 1800s they would try to intentionally give people a mild case of the pox in the hopes of creating immunity (using Cow Pox). I am unaware of what the procedure was in WW I though.
Click to expand...

Originaly actual smallpox was used. Latter switched to Cow Pox
 
Professor Yaffle said:
I think the oral polio vaccine is a live one, and can pass polio on - something about changing nappies springs to mind. In places where polio is rare, it has been replaced by the less effective inactivated vaccine. In places where polio still occurs more often, they stick with the more effective live one.
Click to expand...

Just an FYI. I'm not sure "less effective" is the right adjective here. The killed vaccine takes 3 doses and will probably require future boosters. The live vaccine takes a single dose to start working, though we do give more than one dose to assure 100% uptake.


From the CDC:
Isn't IPV less effective than OPV?

No. The IPV that has been used in the U.S. since 1987 is as effective as OPV for preventing polio in the recipient. After two doses of IPV, 90% or more of recipients have protective antibody levels to all types of poliovirus, and after three doses more than 99% have protective antibodies.
Click to expand...


IPV costs more and requires a skilled person to inject it. In low income countries there is a risk of HIV from reused medical equipment including disposable syringes. OPV is still the better choice in the third world.
 
Capsid said:
The live oral polio (Sabin vaccine) reverts very quickly to wild type on passage through the gut and can infect unvaccinated individuals.

And the MMR is a live virus vaccine, as is the yellow fever vaccine, as is the chicken pox vaccine.
Click to expand...
And FluMist. :D Been giving lots of that lately.
 
After intense scrutiny for negative effects from Thimerosal, none have been found. This preservative has decades long safety track record. People are afraid of the names of things despite the science which confirms their safety.

"Swine" flu vaccine must be dangerous, even though there is scant difference between the seasonal flu vaccine and the swine flu vaccine.

Aluminum, mercury and formaldehyde sound like scary vaccine components so oooowww, they must be bad. All the while infections that kill people are 'natural' so they must be safe. :rolleyes:
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylmercury
Unlike methylmercury, ethylmercury has not been found to bioaccumulate.[2] The toxicity of ethylmercury is not well studied, but exposure standards based on methylmercury (such as those currently recommended by the United States Environmental Protection Agency‎) are not demonstrated to be equivalent for ethylmercury
Click to expand...

Ethylmercury also does not cross the blood brain barrier like Methylmercury. From what I understand, regulations on safe levels of Ethylmercury exposure are based on data we already have on Methylmercury.
 
portlandatheist said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethylmercury


Ethylmercury also does not cross the blood brain barrier like Methylmercury. From what I understand, regulations on safe levels of Ethylmercury exposure are based on data we already have on Methylmercury.
Click to expand...
That's not quite true: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16079072 and good commentary here: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/02/at_least_eli_stone_was_good_for_one_thin.php

One point to counter the anti-vaxiloons is to point out that ethylmercury has an extremely short half-life, especially compared to ethylmercury so it is excreted quickly and doesn't bioaccumulate like methylmercury. Another to consider is that even methylmercury poisoning like those cases found in the Faroe Islands and Minimata Bay do not exhibit autism.
 
If these folks are questioning the need for the smallpox vaccinations I think they should be asked when they last heard of anyone getting it.

Funny how these supposedly "unnecessary" vaccines completely eradicated a very deadly disease.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom