Just some notes to share concerning vaccines

For part of another posting I have been doing some information gathering, primarily video and audio presentations.  It concerns Kent Hovind and Mary Tocco and their stance concerning vaccines.  Being that I have touched on their dribble before and I am in the process another posting, I'm not going to go into much detail concern that issue.

What I found fascinating, for lack of better, specifically a interview with Dr. Larry Tyler.  What followers are my notes concerning what he and Hovind presented and my reaction and/or rebuttal. In other words, if presented with the same information in a discussion, how would I counter it? This is by no means comprehensive or in a fully presentable fashion BUT I found the counter information useful.
__
Come on Larry show me something original that hasn't already been stated by someone else. Something new,,, anything. I mean seriously dude, ya got 15 years (at time of interview) of quack medicine experience.

Sorry to say, you are under-qualified and peddle information and "treatments" that are not supported by science. (This guy practiced chiropractic manipulation on a 2 day old child - his own.) The profession isn't based in science and many of the fundamental ideas the profession holds isn't scientifically plausible. It's not so bad that you peddle this crank, but this garbage is what you are taught.

(FYI my uncle was an MD as well as a doctor of chiropractics. He was my primary doctor until well into my 20s till he retired. Thankfully he was an MD first a chiro second. His philosophy, if you want to call it that, was one of chiro being a "therapy" (like massage therapy) not a primary treatment. While he still had some crank views based on the notions behind chiro, they were well balanced by his training as an MD (ie. he didn't try to "fix" an ear infection by cracking my neck).

My second chiro had the same attitude but regretfully I am paying dearly for the learned ignorance built into their field. I don't feel they are responsible for the issues I deal with now, but my "distrust" or hesitation I currently carry is from their philosophy.)

Vaccines are poison-vaccine ingredients

Formaldehyde (CH20) a naturally occurring substance the body itself produces.

At high enough concentrations and with long-term exposures—such as occupationally—formaldehyde can indeed be toxic. The highest risk of toxicity from formaldehyde is from inhaling it in conditions of unusually high or prolonged exposure.

Under normal conditions, the human body is producing and eliminating its own formaldehyde continuously. Our body uses the molecule to build proteins and nucleotides, two of the four most critical building blocks of life (the other two are lipids and carbohydrates).

According to the U. S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA),

The amount of formaldehyde present in some vaccines is so small compared to the concentration that occurs naturally in the body that it does not pose a safety concern.

We humans are efficient at metabolizing formaldehyde. Our body does not distinguish between formaldehyde from vaccines, and that which is naturally-produced or environmental. Either way, our body goes ahead and breaks formaldehyde down and excretes it the same.

Formaldehyde does not accumulate in the human body. Post-vaccination, formaldehyde is gone from the muscle at the injection site within 30 minutes. Any remaining formaldehyde is less than 1% of the existing, naturally-occurring level in the body.

Concerning vaccines are poison-vaccine ingredients - specifically thimerosal (Ethyl(2-mercaptobenzoato-(2-)-O,S) mercurate(1-) sodium)

As the meme notes, equating the three, elemental mercury (Hg) / methylmercury (CH3Hg+X-) / ethylmercury (CH3CH2-Hg+X-), AVers refuse to provide any mechanism to how thimerosal is changed to either elemental mercury or methyl mercury, or how they can be attributed the same chemical properties. Drawing conclusions on thimerosal toxicity from methyl mercury is also flawed.

If you really want to get an AVer's goat, ask them if they have any tattoos.

Concerning vaccines are poison-vaccine ingredients - specifically aluminum.

Concerns about how aluminum affects health arose in the 1960s and 1970s, when it was thought that there may be a link between Alzheimer's disease and exposure to large amounts of aluminum (subsequent research has largely discredited this idea among scientists, yet it persists among fringe scientists and in public opinion). Similarly, anti-vaccine activists blame the aluminum used as adjuvants in vaccines as a cause of autism. Aluminum is neurotoxic at high levels of exposure, such as among patients with renal dysfunction who are undergoing dialysis with an aluminum-containing dialysate, but it takes a lot of aluminum to cause neurological effects. Even then, its effects are not identical to the symptoms of Alzheimer's disease or autism.
,,,
Some vaccines only use parts of bacteria or viruses, rather than the whole thing. Because of this, large amounts of those parts are required to generate an immune response strong enough to produce immunity. That is, unless an adjuvant is used. An adjuvant is something that is added to a vaccine to boost the immune response, meaning that less of the antigens (those bits and pieces of bacteria and viruses) is required. In adjuvanted vaccines, the antigens are essentially stuck onto aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate (aluminum salts). The aluminum salt serves a few primary roles. First, it gets the immune system's attention. First-responder phagocytes at the injection site will binge on some of the aluminum until they die from overeating, releasing particles that signal cell damage. The next line of phagocytes encounter all of this and are more likely to signal an inflammatory response, recruiting immune cells to find out what's going on. Second, because it is not very soluble, the aluminum salt stays put at the injections site for a while, preventing the antigens from being swept off into the bloodstream and diluted through the body. Keeping the antigens localized gives the immune system more time to investigate and get to know the antigens so that the next time you're exposed, your immune system knows what to do and how best to respond in order to keep you from getting sick. Finally, although not related to its adjuvant activity, it helps stabilize the vaccine and prevent the antigens from precipitating out of solution and sticking to the side of the container. (Sorry about anthropomorphizing the antigens, but sometimes you just have to.) Using an adjuvant like aluminum hydroxide means that less antigen is needed to produce an immune response. That means a reduction in the side effects caused by the antigen and the ability to produce more doses of vaccine without needing to increase antigen production.

The biggest concern about the use of aluminum-based adjuvants is safety. If aluminum is neurotoxic at high, chronic levels of exposure, does that mean it is also neurotoxic at the amounts found in vaccines? The short answer is no. Aluminum salts have been used in vaccines for about 70-80 years. Aluminum adjuvant is not used in any "live" vaccine (MMR, varicella, rotavirus), inactivated polio vaccine (IPV), nor in any influenza vaccine in the U.S.

This entire issue concerning VAERS, the vaccine court, and related is a stinky mess that is twisted by AVers. While specifically related to the MMR and measles, Snopes lays out the facts nicely. 

Even if a minute number of fatalities were proved to have resulted from the MMR vaccine, it would still be impossible to accurately contrast that figure with deaths due to a disease no longer spreading in the United States during the period selected. That speculation itself, however, is a big "if." According to the article, their figures for MMR deaths were culled from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), but VAERS does not exist to track specific and proved adverse reactions to vaccines. The purpose of the system is clearly denoted on the VAERS site (in a disclaimer not reproduced by the article spreading the claim):

When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.

Submission to VAERS alone is not evidence of vaccine-related injury or illness. The overwhelming majority of young children residing in the United States receive the MMR vaccine early in their lives, and a small number of those children have become ill (some fatally) due to reasons found to be unrelated to the vaccine. There is nothing to preclude individuals from submitting VAERS reports of sickness or death that are wholly unrelated to vaccines, and the system exists not to track substantiated incidents of vaccine injury but to identify potential trends in vaccine administration.

As I noted concerning the Cutter Incident,

So based on a very quick search, one finds that within 2-3 minutes Tocco has imbibed in her first set of hyperbole. What I have found is, all told, 220,000 people were infected; 70,000 developed muscle weakness. Of 164 people who developed paralysis in response to the vaccine, 10 died. Though tragic, the global end to polio transmission would have been inconceivable without the vaccine. (Think of the total number vaccinated in the US alone.)

It is also important to remember that in the 1950s, protecting the public from polio was a national project. (It was a national campaign financed by the March of Dimes that made it such.) Every effort was made to see that the vaccine would be widely available to all children and polio would be wiped out. In the U.S., the last case of naturally occurring polio happened in 1979.

While tragic, as all deaths are, it sometimes happens. Medical treatment is not without risk, but how many millions world-wide have been saved.

Big pHARMA-medical conspiracy, ex. Asthma


Although video does not address Tyler’s points directly, the sentiment is the same when an individual forgoes SBM for woo.

I have a piece coming concerning Big pHARMA and the pHARMA shill. As I noted,

If you really believe the world is so devoid of compassion and human decency that scientists would go out of their way to intentionally harm the population; that probably says more about your cynical morals that anything else. I know you aren’t going to change your mind, because every high quality, peer reviewed study is “bought and paid for” and you will discard any piece of evidence unless it agrees with you. If you want my advice, go move away to your own colony and spend your days tickling each others’ confirmation bias until you realise that vaccination has a purpose and that it works. The sad thing is that your parents and grandparents likely had the good sense to vaccinate their own kids; but you won’t vaccinate your own. The chances are that your children are the ones that are going to suffer.

This is what I am left with after listening to Tyler's diatribe especially concerning asthma.

It should be noted that this video I believe came out in 2004 or 2005. Just prior to Hovind going to prison. What is important to note, the "talking points" have not changed in 11+ years. I am not aware of Tyler's views currently and my criticism is solely based on this video.

As I said these are just notes to gain perspective on Hovind's health views but some of the rebuttal information I felt was important to share as I don't know what the final product may be.