RFK Jr's book titled, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak (in which the science never actually spoke)...Dr. Offit well stated as per your many comments.
Those wanting more details on the objective & scientific facts of methyl cf Ethylmercury can review the Substack post from Dr. Andrea Love 👍
The egregious actions of RFK Jr & other sycophants of the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave are beyond hypocritical given the consequences 😥
MAHA...healthy, your healthcare system is in complete disarray, compounded by the strain on the system prior to the actions of those above.
Allowing for the inaccurate presentation of thimerosal at the recent ACIP meeting, should be grounds for RFK Jr's resignation.
DOGE, the annunciation of which may have the vannier of something 'romantic', there is nothing to be embraced from the actions of those who orchestrated the decimation of USAID 😥😥
Why should I care? The events unfolding in the US are **wrong** on multiple levels/fronts. Citizens of the USA can disagree with the policies of any "administration", however there can be no disputing the bully, buffoon is orchestrating one of the most tragic chapters in American history. ☹️
One of the few scientists who has recognised there is a war against science and that the enemy is winning and laying down the law and that scientists need to push back forcefully to defend science against ignorant, antivax arseholes.
Thanks for continuing to be the most eloquent voice on this and keeping it top of mind when it’s easy to be distracted by so much else going on. The children cannot be forgotten!
I support Kennedy and have worked for Children's Health Defense in the past. I am a doctor with no training in epidemiology or infectious disease. How and why would someone like me decide to support him?
It's not because I was seduced by his messaging. It's not because I am stupid. It's because I am a father first. Just as important, it's because of posts like these from folks who are the spokespersons for the medical establishment. While Kennedy may not be a doctor he doesn't misrepresent information the way Dr. Offit does here. Paul is a smart fellow. I don't for one second believe that he believes what he is saying.
I will break down Dr. Offit's lapses in logic and lack of coherence.
Taking thimerosal out of multi-dose vials is a mistake, because Offit says, it would lead to cellulitis, abscesses and blood stream infections because that's what happened in the days before preservatives. Agreed. These can be avoided in two ways: stop using multidose vials, or put other, safer "preservatives" in the formulation.
I don't inject children with vaccines. I am an anesthesiologist, so I do my fair share of injecting things into people on a daily basis. When we are injecting anesthetic into the most vulnerable parts of a patient's body, like the epidural space or the intrathecal space (which bathes the spinal chord and brain) we never, ever inject anything with preservatives. Why? Because they are toxic at some level. They are designed to prevent the growth of bacteria, i.e. they kill living organisms. That's why we keep them away from nerve cells.
So Paul is saying that it would be okay to leave thimerosal in vaccines and give them to millions of children? Why? Why not just eliminate multidose vials? Is it too expensive for our kids?
Next, Offit subtly substitutes thimerosal with "preservatives". Is he really advocating for a derivative of what is arguably the most neurotoxic element to be given to children when alternatives exist?
Then Offit attacks the AAP for advocating for the removal of thimerosal from the DTaP, Hep-B and HiB vaccines because they kowtowed to the "antivaccine" movement. Okay. What happened next? Was there an outbreak of abscesses and infections like he predicted would happen? No there wasn't. So no harm done. Why didn't he mention this if that is his argument?
Instead he points to a single case of a baby who died with fulminant hepatitis-B 26 years ago because the facility where the child was born was concerned about the thimerosal in the Hep-B vaccine. How do we know that the vaccine would have prevented the death? We don't know that. In fact, the number of children needed to be vaccinated to prevent a single infant mortality in this country is far greater than 1,000. The vaccine is good, but it is not perfect and it doesn't help every child who gets it.
In this case, the child was born to a mother who tested positive for Hep-B and would have probably benefited from having their baby vaccinated. The hospital was unaware of her positive serology test. But Offit cannot state that vaccination would have saved this child in particular. That requires a vaccine that is 100% effective. Right now, over 90% of infants are vaccinated for Hep-B. That still means that there are millions of kids who never received the vaccine. Yet there are virtually no infant mortalities from Hep-B.
Offit states that "antivaxx" people "pounced" when the FDA investigated the use of thimerosal in medical products in 1997. "No one more so than Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who wrote a book titled, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak (in which the science never actually spoke)."
Paul, the problem here is that that book was written in 2014, 17 years after the FDA took action. You've got the entire timeline wrong. Neither did he write the book himself. It was co-authored by MDs, one of which is a pediatric neurologist whom I know personally. And yes, they cited tons of science, including epidemiological patterns, cellular and animal studies and CDC funded studies that all suggested harm from thimerosal. You are blatantly misrepresenting the facts.
Offit then says that there are "about ten" studies that show no harm. But these studies weren't designed to investigate "harm", they were designed to test the hypothesis that thimerosal was linked to autism. It is true that they didn't show a link to autism. What is interesting about most of them is that the incidence of autism INCREASED after thimerosal was removed.
What does this mean? That mercury derived preservatives in vaccines prevent autism? Of course not. It means that the study was confounded by other factors. Could it be an increase in the number of vaccines children were exposed to during the observational period? Maybe. Uh-oh...
On the same page (which takes you to a PSA page from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia where I also trained) the reader is treated to more information is given "in support "of the safety of mercury. There was an incident in Iraq in 1971 where people at grains fumigated with mercury. Thousands were hospitalized, 450 people died. Pregnant mothers who ate these products did NOT have children with an increased risk of autism. (Phew!)
They did, however give birth to babies who had epilepsy and mental retardation at higher rates. So it's okay to inject these derivatives but not eat them? Nothing to see here...
Offit then rehashes a specious argument that "studies had shown that the level of mercury in the bloodstream doesn’t change after receiving thimerosal-containing vaccines". This is particularly intriguing. Kennedy tells of a conversation with Offit on this specific topic years ago when Paul cited this particular evidence of safety.
The question that Kennedy posed, which Dr. Offit never answered, is so what happened to the mercury? How do we know that some of it doesn't leave the bloodstream and accumulate in the tissues and brain? Bobby said that Paul never answered the question, and they never had another direct conversation again.
Would you care to answer that Dr. Offit? Do you have a study that you can cite which looks at mercury concentrations in the brains of children who suffered neurodevelopmental disorders after receiving thimerosal containing vaccines? Or is this the reason why you declined to ever have another public conversation with the Secretary of HHS?
Lastly, Offit cites Kennedy's "lengthy history of suing vaccine makers for false claims of harm". Which lawsuits Paul? To my knowledge Kennedy has only sued Merck for the harms caused by their HPV vaccine. That suit is yet to be adjudicated, so you have no grounds to call them "false claims of harm". In any case, are you opposed to holding vaccine manufacturers accountable if there is sufficient evidence that their products cause harm in specific cases? We both know that the Vaccine Injury Compensation fund has paid out over $5 billions dollars to over ten thousand families with children who have suffered devastating injury from these products. You are okay with letting the public foot the bill for these injuries?
Children's Health Defense has brought a number of lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers during the pandemic but Kennedy is not directly involved with those cases. He is has not been affiliated with this organization for over two years.
This post is more Vaccine Industry propaganda from their biggest spokesperson which can be dismantled in just a few minutes of cross checking his claims.
It's amazing that you would even write a post like this, Paul. Are you really advocating for putting thimerosal back into vaccines? Why on Earth would you want that? There are alternatives. There is no necessity for this. There hasn't been the explosion of infections since thimerosal was pulled from most vaccines.
When you attack people like Lyn Redwood who is a nurse practitioner who has been digging into the data and studies for decades and has cared for a child with neurodevelopmental issues immediately following inoculation with thimerosal containing vaccines you are losing all credibility as an advocate for children's health.
This is why more and more people and those with medical training are backing the referendum on vaccines and a revamping of the regulatory agencies.
Okay Billie-Joe. We are ready to hear your thoughtful counter arguments...
When thimerosal was removed from the vaccine production in 1999/2000, it was not replaced with alternative preservatives, but production moved to single dose, preservative-free vaccine (including the Hep B). Remaining vials of vaccines with thimerosal were supposed to be "used up" to avoid wastage, but most medical organisations were reluctant to use them. Initially supplies of Hep B vavccine were sometimes compromised by this reluctance to give or to receive the "old" thimerosal containing vaccine. Cost of vaccine greatly increased, further compromising availability, and third world countries had significant delays during the transition.
You agree that thimerosal as a preservative will eliminate bacterial and fungal contamination of multidose vials, but say that there is no evidence that thimerosal did reduce infection because when it was removed infection rates did not rise....but you would not expect there to be a rise in infections because the switch was to single dose sterile vials. They didn't just continue to use multidose vials without any preservative [your implication]...that would have been pretty stupid.
(I think I'm right in saying there *was* an increase in soft tissue infections in children after 2000 or so, but that was primarily driven by community MRSA prevalence increase, and probably not because of the elimination of thimerosal from vaccines).
"The question that Kennedy posed, which Dr. Offit never answered, is so what happened to the mercury?"
Thimerosal rapidly undergoes hydrolysis once it enters the body, breaking down into ethylmercury and thiosalicylate. Ethyl mercury is conjugated in the liver, and excreted in the bile and urine. It's half life is between one to two weeks.
Ethyl mercury can cross the blood brain barrier, but in small quantities and animal studies show it is eliminated within a few days. Methyl merculy readily crosses into the brain since it is lipophilic; ethyl mercury not so much.
These references will fill in the detail:
The pharmacokinetics of thimerosal in humans: A review of the literature.
Michael J. D. Chisholm, A. E. Noren, R. G. Rich
Thimerosal and vaccines: A review of the literature
Authors: R. S. F. Hopkins, A. L. Z. Sweeney
Safety of Vaccines and Thimerosal: A Review of the Evidence
Authors: T. M. Miller, G. L. Nelson
Mercury Exposure and Health Effects: A Review of the Literature
Authors: B. A. Nuttall, H. M. Patrick
Ethylmercury from Thimerosal: A Review of Safety Issues and Risks
L. L. Giroux, P. L. Miller
Dr Setty, you say: "We both know that the Vaccine Injury Compensation fund has paid out over $5 billions dollars to over ten thousand families with children who have suffered devastating injury from these products. You are okay with letting the public foot the bill for these injuries?"
FYI the compensation paid out by the vaccine court (NVICP) is indicative of succesful claims for vaccine damage, where the onus of proof of causation has been lifted from the plaintiff. All that they have to do to get compensation is to show that the child had a condition that is on the tabled list of possible vaccine complications...they don't need to prove the vaccine caused the condition. For example, if a child developed intussusception within 3 months of a rotavirus vaccine, compensation will be paid even if the problem was caused by something else. For claims of damage not listed on the table, then they will have to persuade the court that the vaccine was responsible "on the balance of probabilities" (and not "beyond all reasonable doubt" which is the standard in Tort claims. So the bar for compensation is set much lower than you might expect.
The court has compensated 6,800 families between 1986 and 2021, not "over ten thousand". This represents one successful claim per 100,00 vaccine doses administered. The commonest condition was GBS in 20-25% of successful claims, followed by allergy/anaphylaxis (20%).
The funding for the VICP and the compensation, and ALL legal fees for plaintiffs (even for unsuccessful claims) is NOT footed by the public. It is paid for by a an excise tax levied on the vaccine manufacturers for each vaccine component, at a rate of 75c per component (so a single MMR vaccine shot would raise $2.25 in tax for the VICP fund).
Why is "attacking" someone like Lyn Redwood for presenting vaccine disinformation at an ACIP meeting (which is a highly important forum for discussions and guidance on vaccine issues, and a forum that Dr Offit himself attended many times over the years) so awful that it would "lose [Offit's] credibility? She has far less expertise in these topics than does Dr Offit.
You have attacked Dr Offit...may I say that has lost you your credibility? ...I think I can.
Thanks, Mike, I have already corrected Mad Dog Setty's previous copy-pastes but he never responds. He just comes back and repeats the lies like a rubber duck that have to be drowned over and over again.
The fv<ker does not respond because he knows the dags hanging off his arse hairs following him around will only read his comments.
Excellent response. It’s disturbing to see so many professionals too furious to respond respectfully and with good information. Personally I got more from this than Offits piece.
Honestly the fury just indicates rigidity which suggests there is far too much enforced group think. It’s no wonder then that public confidence is shaken. No science that involves complex systems is absolute. As well, given concentration of power today, In the case of vaccines one can never ignore the gigantic industry behind them.
This will sound ironic, but you need to be more flexible in your thinking. Fury can indicate many things.
Firstly, there is more than one way to skin a cat. Secondly, there are situations in which respect can backfire by giving an idiot a seat at the table that they do not deserve. I also get the impression you have not dealt with antivaxxers long enough to know how deceitful they are and how much they crave to be accepted . And now that they have this acceptance by the present regime in the US, they have literally become insufferable arseholes, sorry,
And fury can also indicate passion, a passion based on knowledge and understanding of science and an abhorrence of those who lack that knowledge and understanding and spread misinformation that kills - in this case infants and young children.
"No science that involves complex systems is absolute"
Science itself is never absolute, but that does not mean that some arseholes who talk about science are quite simply wrong. And antivaxxers ARE, quite simply, wrong
"one can never ignore the gigantic industry behind them."
Indeed. I am on record here as advocating for maximum government regulation of the pharmaceutical industry and maximum fines for failing to abide by those regulations. Interestingly, I have yet to see any of the antivaxxers here agree with me. You know why? They are against government regulation. It's a large part of the reason that they are antivax!
What occurred during Covid effectively collapsed trust. Those products rely on public trust and industry/government/military operation did not engender trust and was actually abusive. Now skepticism is spreading which is understandable.
Because ignoring antivaxxers over the past 20 years has resulted in what we see today in the US. Antivaxxers in power laying down the law. Before the pandemic most medical scientists and most medical practitioners were what we referred to as "shruggies": why bother?
Mike, clearly you are well informed. An "insider" to the data. I have spent half my adult life reading more than 10,000 pages of material. Facts. So, I commend you for your posting. There is where I draw the line. Were you cross examined, likely you would be asked:
1) Given the stipulation that Ethyl Hg CAN cross the blood brain barrier, is it predictable, based on the dose and the weight of an infant, can you say whether or not brain injury is plausible? Does every infant "clear" the poison equally.
2) Does the cumulative effects of Ethyl Hg from multi dose vials matter?
3) Why hasn't autism been listed as a "table injury" by the USCFC in the VICP?
Remember a lawyer neve asks any questions for which he/she does not already know the answers. The jury needs to hear this in a Court of Law. Our Justice system is one which due process must prevail.
For the record, you made one factual mistake above. A civil suit does NOT require "beyond a reasonable doubt." In tort claims, the standard of proof required is a "preponderance of the evidence."
Thanks for your correction on “beyond reasonable doubt”. It’s my UK side kicking in.
Autism isn’t caused by vaccines so it isn’t categorised as a table injury. However encephalitis and encephalopathy are ( these can complicate some vaccines, particularly live virus vaccines)
Ethyl mercury is considered to be around 50 times less toxic than methyl mercury, which can also be cumulative. I gather that based on animal studies it also clears much more rapidly from organs including the brain around 10 times faster than methyl mercury.
Brain injury from ethyl mercury is plausible, but would require a significant metabolic defect to preexist (likely a genetic syndrome) and I am unaware of one such in humans. In real terms, exposure through other prevalent sources of mercury such as diet, air and water would dwarf the quantity delivered by TCVs.
To put into context, a pregnant woman is allowed to eat up to 2-3 servings of skipjack tuna per week (20mcg methyl mercury per serving).
This Me Hg is around 95% absorbed, so over 9 months a woman could theoretically absorb 40 x 50mcg x 95% = 1,900mcg METHYL mercury.
She might currently be offered one flu jab with 25mcg of ETHYL mercury, and even then she would likely opt for the thimerosal free version.
You see the problem?
It isn’t thimerosal.
Getting rid of multidose TCVs which comprise less than 5% of the flu vaccine market is merely a frothy distraction. Rather like thinking that getting rid of plastic straws is going to save the planet.
Mike. My infant/toddler son received every single possible inoculation from a multi-dose vial. ( where the routine childhood schedule called for a vaccine that was indicated). We were never aware or offered any alternative. As you know, this would allow one to calculate the MCg delivered.
"Autism" is consistently used as a catch all phrase here in the U.S. We proffered such in Court pleadings we had planned. Unfortunately, when forced to the USCFC, our case was dismissed on the 36 month statute of limitations. Not sure what they say in UK, but this is a "catch-22." Better still, the fix was in. USCFC is a "kangaroo Court." Not one designed to compensate one from injury.
P.S. The whole point of the "phony" Omnibus Autism Hearings here in U.S. was to prevent the diagnosis "autism" from being a table injury. Doctors were unable to immediately diagnose the high fever, let alone most report to VAERS that an adverse event even occured. "Autism" was ( in 1994) rarely even "spoken."
None of my comments herein are meant to be a "distraction" nor a social commentary on vaccines writ large. My goal is for our due process rights to be recognized and for us to be able to seek relief for our son's injuries.
It will be a very large sum. The Phrma lobby has made certain that they not pay for this tragedy for as long as possible.
Thank you for being civil. Maybe that's "UK kicking in." My wife is a Canadian. I am usually not so nice!
You have my sympathies for your situation and travails.
In the early 90s, the total mercury quantity in the childhood schedule would have been 175mcg; if Hep B is added in it would be 212.5mcg.
Of course, thimerosal is not the only concern, but from my perspective aluminium from adjuvants is a similar case…the quantity delivered is less than most usual environmental and dietary exposures, even calculating for the low oral absorbtion.
Hatters were negatively affected by inorganic mercury nitrate (which, like all nitrates is fully soluble in water), but even that took time to develop. Also, I suspect that during those times children were exposed to the compound as well.
I don't have the education & training nor knowledge of the factual history referenced to counter most of your argument(s), however is there direct evidence the tragic events stated with respect to Ms. Redwood 's child were the result of the vaccine the child received or what I offer is more likely a tragic coincidence.
What we're witnessing in the irate responses to Dr. Setty is mainly a blend of "parental users' bias" and "buyers' remorse" (courtesy of US tax dollars). Parents who have allowed their children to be injected with a known neurotoxin, a substance that can lead to a range of neurological problems, will be disinclined to take responsibility and to consider reasonable alternatives. Why would we need a mercury-based additive, the primary purpose of which is to allow for multiple vaccinations (far beyond the number necessary), including a routine shot for hepatitis B in babies who are at virtually zero risk of HBV infection? Interesting to note that Offit uses a rare case of death by HBV as an example of how aversion to thimerasol can result in death. Where is the risk-benefit analysis for such an extremely biased example?
Correction of the science illiteracy of this freak boy:
1) The dose is the poison.
2) Vaccinations are far less of a risk than the infectious diseases they prevent.
3) Vaccinations save 3 million lives every year.
4) Scientists look for better alternatives all the time.
5) Mercury in vaccines is to prevent infection at injection sites which can lead to septicaemia.
6) The birth dose of Hep B vaccine reduced prevalence of Hep B infection in children under the age of 5 from nearly 5% to les then 1%, and reduced death from chronic hepatitis, hepatic failure and hepatic cancer by 72%.
Precisely correct. This is a classic example of using cherry picked examples of morbidity from infectious disease to argue for universal vaccination with no consideration of the risks and limited effectiveness of these measures.
And, as you pointed out, the tenor of the responses point to something painful and irrational.
This kind of irrational behavior was to be expected when RFK, Jr., exposed a CDC study (previously concealed) showing an approximate 1100% increase in autism in association with the HBV vaccine. Offit needs to be able to sleep at night.
This ignorant and gullible "Biologist & Public Health Scientist", M.N. Mead, is either a lying arsehole or an ignorant buffoon.
Here are the facts:
The claim comes from a 1999 analysis by CDC scientist Thomas Verstraeten, who examined data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink. In early drafts, there was a reported 1135% increased risk of autism among children who received the HBV vaccine within the first 30 days of life compared to those who received it later or not at all. However, the data was preliminary and unadjusted for confounding factors and, when it was, the association disappeared. Subsequently multiple large-scale studies, including those from Denmark and the U.S., have found no causal link between vaccines and autism. Both the Institute of Medicine and World Health Organization have reviewed the evidence and concluded that vaccines do not cause autism.
I would appreciate you citing this previously concealed study indicating a 1100% increase in autism associated with HBV vaccination if you would be so kind.
I am presuming that, if you felt justified in raising this issue as a "Biologist & Public Health Scientist," which I can only gather must presume certain ethical assumptions, you are able to provide a reasonable citation to substantiate your claim, and likewise justify Dr. Setty's endorsement. Otherwise, I will presume you are nothing more than simply another anti-vaccination advocate spreading more "mythology." I sincerely hope that is not the case. Perhaps Dr. Setty can bail you out without waking Dr. Offit?
I'm sorry that this is such a difficult issue. When RFK, Jr. highlighted a CDC study showing a 1,135% elevated risk of autism among children receiving the HBV vaccine, many MDs were immensely upset, particularly those who had been dolling out the shots with gusto & abandon (with pediatricians incentivized to the tune of $200-$600 per patient). Kennedy said the CDC tried to hide the study’s findings using statistical trickery, and frankly I believe him. I've seen so much scientific dishonesty over the past 5 years that it's par for the course.. By the way, the original CDC study was led by Belgian researcher Thomas Verstraeten.
You might want to check out my recent paper published in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Research & Innovation.
Keep on presuming but also try to maintain an open yet skeptical mind. I'll post the documentation for this re-analysis of the Verstraeten et al. research once it's released.
Conclusions: The safety and efficacy of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have been examined in extensive clinical studies. Myocarditis and pericarditis have been mentioned in rare cases as adverse effects in several investigations. In clinical studies for the BNT162b2 vaccine, myocarditis and pericarditis were found in roughly 0.02% and 0.01% of vaccine recipients, respectively. The mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine also showed that about 0.03% of recipients experienced myocarditis, and about 0.01% experienced pericarditis in clinical trials... In summary, the current COVID-19 vaccines have clearly demonstrated efficacy and undoubtedly proved that the benefits overweigh the risks by a big margin. However, it cannot be denied that adverse events, although at a low frequency, including the development of myocarditis, have been documented in vaccinated individuals. Due to the global administration of more than 13.3 billion COVID-19 vaccine, doses it is not unexpected for adverse events to occur. For this reason, it is important that clinicians monitor any symptoms developed after vaccinations with current COVID-19 vaccines.
Pillay, J, et al. Incidence, risk factors, natural history, and hypothesised mechanisms of myocarditis and pericarditis following covid-19 vaccination: living evidence syntheses and review. the bmj | BMJ 2022;378:e069445 | doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-069445.
As the incidence of myocarditis after mRNA vaccination is a rare adverse event, the findings must be considered alongside the overall benefits of vaccination and with detailed risk-benefit analyses to support policy recommendations for optimal dosing intervals and vaccine products for different populations. As the covid-19 pandemic enters its third year, continued surveillance of myocarditis after mRNA vaccines, especially in younger ages, after dose three (and subsequent doses) and in previous cases is needed to support continued decision making for covid-19 boosters. Additional monitoring of populations with clinical comorbidities of interest (eg, cardiac conditions, previous myocarditis,
immunocompromised, etc) is also needed to inform on best practices. Long term follow-up of patients with myocarditis is needed to better understand the natural history including disease recurrence. Finally, multicentre prospective studies with appropriate testing (eg, biopsy, tissue morphology) will enhance understanding of the mechanism or mechanisms of myocarditis and pericarditis after vaccination. This understanding will help to identify and guide recommendations for those who might be at higher risk.
Patone, M, et al. Risk of Myocarditis After Sequential Doses of COVID-19 Vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 Infection by Age and Sex. Circulation. 2022;146:743–754. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.059970
First, the risk of myocarditis is substantially higher after SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated individuals than the increase in risk observed after a first dose of ChAdOx1nCoV-19 vaccine, and a first, second, or booster dose of BNT162b2 vaccine. Second, although the risk of myocarditis with SARS-CoV-2 infection remains after vaccination, it was substantially reduced, suggesting vaccination provides some protection from the cardiovascular consequences of SARS-CoV-2The risk of vaccine-associated myocarditis is small, with up to an additional 2 events per million people in the 28-day period after exposure to all vaccine doses other than mRNA-1273. This is substantially lower than the 35 additional myocarditis events observed with SARS-CoV-2 infection before vaccination. Furthermore, vaccination reduced the risk of infection associated myocarditis by approximately half, suggesting that the prevention of infection associated myocarditis may be an additional longer-term benefit of vaccination.
In summary, the risk of hospital admission or death from myocarditis is greater after SARS-CoV2 infection than COVID-19 vaccination and remains modest after sequential doses including a booster dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. However, the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is higher in younger men, particularly after a second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine.
Patone, M, et al. Risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias associated with COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nature Medicine | VOL 28 | February 2022 | 410–422 | www.nature.com/naturemedicine.
Whilst myocarditis can be life-threatening, most vaccine-associated myocarditis events have been mild and self-limiting The risk observed here is small and confined to the 7-day period following vaccination, whereas the lifetime risk of morbidity and mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection is substantial. Indeed, myocardial injury is very common in persons admitted to hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection26, when evaluated systematically using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin tests27. Moreover, evidence of myocardial injury, irrespective of whether due to myocarditis or myocardial ischemia, is associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death. We estimate that the absolute number of excess myocarditis events in the 28 days following a first dose of adenovirus or mRNA vaccine is between one and six per million persons vaccinated, and the excess risk following the second dose of the mRNA-1283 vaccine is ten per million. By contrast, we estimate 40 excess myocarditis events per million in the 28 days following SARS-CoV-2 infection. The risks are more evenly balanced in younger persons aged up to 40 years, where we estimated the excess in myocarditis events following SARS-CoV-2 infection to be 10 per million with the excess following a second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine being 15 per million. Further research is required to understand why the risk of myocarditis seems to be higher following mRNA-1273 vaccine. Although the wider societal benefits of controlling the spread of virus to those who are more vulnerable are substantial, these data may help inform public health policy and the choice of vaccine offered to younger adults.
In summary, this population-based study quantifies for the first time the risk of several rare cardiac adverse events associated with three COVID-19 vaccines as well as SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 in adults was associated with a small increase in the risk of myocarditis within a week of receiving the first dose of both adenovirus and mRNA vaccines, and after the second dose of both mRNA vaccines. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a substantial increase in the risk of hospitalization or death from myocarditis, pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmia.
I would add that I left several comments on Peter McCollough's site questioning why he never addresses the point of the greater probability of contracting myocarditis directly from SARS-CoV-2 disease than any Covid-19 vaccine. I have never received a response.
This is not a "previously concealed" study indicating a massive, inordinate increase in ASD related to HBV, for which you have no documented evidence whatsoever. You have only compounded your misrepresentation by further claims of Sec. Kennedy and claims of "scientific dishonesty," which you likewise have provide no documentation. Instead you provide a paper - no better than a single, ridiculous opinion, which is contrary to a much larger body of trustworthy research opinion, discussed ad nauseam on this blog, had you taken the time to investigate before insulting me.
I would suggest to you that, as a physician and researcher, I, for one, simply do not need to be lectured by someone obviously intent on confusing the issues, as to my responsibility to "remain skeptical" and open minded as a scientist. Period.
The ones who cherrypick and manipulate morbidity and mortality charts are the antivaxers, and CHD is among them. Pure disinformation calculated to paint vaccines in the worst possible light.
I agree the tenor of responses to this disinformation can be painful, but they are not irrational; it is the rational, reasonable individuals who are so fed up with trying to constantly refute the fire-hosed antivax propaganda that they sometimes resort to invective. But sometimes that’s the only thing that can get people’s attention.
Bobby's "going wild on healthcare." The people running things don't care about the details. The undermining of institutions and "expertise" is the point. The public's outrage and apololexy are welcomed, as are the cultust's adulation and glee. Only he can save us. All that came before were corrupt (globalists), and so on.
Thank you for enlightening us to erosion of vaccines for their personal gain. Have enjoyed hearing you at state conferences and reading the information you provide to us. Please keep providing the science. ❤️
If we can’t get enough flu vaccine this year for all the hospital staff who need it, we’ll all be back to wearing masks again. Staff will have to wear them all day everyday and patients will have to when they come to the office. Some patients will be grateful, some will be furious and refuse. So some patients won’t come in who should be seen because they’re afraid of the non-compliars. Some staff, including nurses like me, will refuse to see patients who don’t comply, or just quit/retire, making access harder for everyone. History will repeat itself. This is what happened during COVID in many states.
I still remember the early days when you were all regarded as national heroes.
The way that changed was horrible to witness, as if killing people wasn't enough, they had to target those trying to save their lives as well. I can understand the frustration and burn out but don't let the bastards win.
Thank you. Ah yes, the 7:00 applause. Also, my colleague walking into a patient room to find a family member just about to pour ivermectin into their ventilator tubing. This was 2021 when limited visitors were allowed back. I’m nearly 64, time for me to retire anyway. People should be aware that no or little flu and COVID vaccine + Medicaid cuts (and even the threat of them coming) = much reduced access to care for EVERYONE especially in rural areas. Take care out there!
It's a difficult situation in the US. Here we have universal health care and agreement by both major parties and the most popular minor party regarding vaccinations and a general sense by the population that it is better to cooperate with expertise than listen to grifting social media gurus.
Only a tiny amount of thimerosal is present in the multidose vaccine formulations, and post-injection, it is diluted in the body tissues to minuscule levels. More significantly, while methylmercury in fish and mercuric salts in the environment have high bioavailability in humans (most of the mercury gets into the circulation), the ethylmercury in Thimerosal is not in a free state but rather covalently linked to a salicylic acid. The mercury is therefore not bioavailable, such that little to none or it gets into the brain. As a biologist I believe that assigning a single event as the root cause of neurodiversity is far too simplistic given the complexity of human biology in general, and neurodevelopment in particular. It is far more likely that neurodiversity is the result of developmental processes that begin in utero.
Ethyl Hg is still "toxic." Less dangerous is not a legal standard. Multiple injections deliver sufficient micrograms can accumulate and to do permanent damage. We can prove this. But, our government decided that Phrma should be shielded from liability. That is indefensible.
Correction of the lies of this science illiterate antivaxxer:
1) The dose is the poison
This means everything is "toxic" if the dose is high enough. Drink 5 litres of water within a few hours and you risk death. It also means that everything in NOT "toxic" if the dose is low enough. The dose of ethyl mercury in vaccines is NOT "toxic".
2) The dose of ethyl mercury is not "less dangerous", it is below the level at which it could cause harm. The dose is the poison.
3) It is true that if "sufficient micrograms accumulate it can do damage. The doses employed in the vaccines are NOT sufficient to do this, not by a long shot. The dose is the poison.
4) Pharmaceutical companies are NOT shielded from liability. That is a blatant unadulterated lie that does not become true because ignorant antivaxxers like this one keep repeating that blatant unadulterated lie.
The pharmaceutical companies are NOT shielded from liability, you need to read the relevant legislation and what it entails for the vaccine recipients,the federal government and the pharmaceutical companies. If it did shield pharmaceutical companies from liability then a certain lawyer in the current administration would not have been able to try and sue them.
I am aware of all of the statutes surrounding the NCVIA of 1986. The conditions to be met, etc. We have been represented by one of the nation's largest mass tort plaintiff's attorneys, one of the most prominent firms that practice at USCFC and each concluded, along with the Federal Judge who was forced to "dismiss" our case ( it was the first to be "stayed", pending outcomes in USCFC).
Please, if you have an insight that suggests a different avenue, please suggest it. But a channel that is similar to every other drug product liability precedent. Thanks.
"We have been represented by one of the nation's largest mass tort plaintiff's attorneys, one of the most prominent firms that practice at USCFC ..."
They are not. Parroting their marketing material as credible suggests that you've been suckered. Goniffs will gonigf, especially from those seeking hope, and looking to blame.
Best practice and health authority recommended in Ontario Canada, children in grades 7 & 8 can receive ...not forced...Hep B & Gardasil...why because reality & health data knows them to becoming sexually activity.
Babies/newborns are not routinely given HBV antinatal.
Gardasil is completely beneficial & for many like saving.
Aluminum in vaccines is an adjuvant & NOT a toxin.
You can challenge & disagree but (full-stop) Dr. Andres Love who's reputation & credentials are 'rock solid' recently posted an excellent explanation of the unquestionable benefits of HBV on newborns along with the rationale cf other countries.
Dr. Jen Gunter MD also solid credentials, who's posts are well referenced from reputable, peer reviewed academic journals has also posted the factual benefits of Gardasil.
I have frequently stayed in my post/comments everyone is entitled titled to an opinion & their beliefs but they are not entitled to misinform others when they don't understand or are unaware of the factual science.
It is remarkable that Dr. Offit complains about ONE infant who died from Hepatitis B because he wasn't vaccinated against it...but that was at a time BEFORE women in labor were tested for Hep B. Nowadays, every laboring woman is tested for Hep B before birth, which therefore negates the necessity to vaccinate every newborn.
As for the 10 trials that supposedly showed that vaccines with mercury didn't cause autism...well, Dr. Offit obviously knows (and should have known) that none of these trials were set-up to test for SAFETY...instead, they were primarily tested for EFFICACY. Dr. Offit KNOWS that these are two different goals.
For more critique of other misstatements in this blog, read Dr. Setty's review.
Have a listen to the abject ignorance of this lying turd:
"every laboring woman is tested for Hep B before birth"
Correction:
1) The testing is done during pregnancy, not while they are in labour.
2) Pregnant transmen are also tested.
"therefore negates the necessity to vaccinate every newborn"
The ignorance here is staggering - and deadly!
Correction of this Dull Man's bullshit:
1) This test, like all tests, is not perfect. In other words, there are false negatives. And a pregnant person may have been infected recently and not yet test positive. There can also be errors in testing and reporting.
2) Besides vertical transmission (mother-to-baby) there is also horizontal transmission. Babies can be exposed to hepatitis B from other household members or caregivers who may unknowingly carry the virus.
3) The birth dose acts as a safety net, protecting babies during a vulnerable window before their next scheduled vaccines.
4) The birth dose prevents both vertical and horizontal transmission.
So, even with a negative test result, the vaccine is a crucial layer of protection.
"For more critique of other misstatements in this blog, read Dr. Setty's review."
Are you telling me that you blindly accepted what that disgusting human being told you with the due diligence of checking. You do understand that this makes YOU his accomplice in child murder, right?
Approximately 0.7-0.9% of American women have chronic Hepatitis B infection prior to labor. And so, sweet BillyJoe adovates for giving EVERY newborn the Hep B vaccine! Yeah, just another dose of injected aluminum. And because there are no replicated trials of newborns comparing the placebo and treated groups, no one really knows the safety of these vaccines. So, sweet BillyJoe is an advoate of medical child abuse. Bye bye.
It’s not aluminium but a compound that includes aluminium, that’s like saying eating salt is the same as eating metallic sodium and breathing chlorine. Your body is full of calcium, phosphorus, sulphur, carbon, hydrogen, iron, potassium, none of which in their elemental state would be particularly healthy.
"Approximately 0.7-0.9% of American women have chronic Hepatitis B infection prior to labor"
That is NOW - after the introduction of the birth dose of the Hep B vaccination!
Stopping the birth dose of the Hep B vaccine would result in the prevalence of Hep B infection in children under the age of 5 increasing from <1% now to the 5% we saw in the 1980s when the vaccine was given only to high-risk infants
Also:
- what about acute Hep B infection?
- what about the false positives?
- what about horizontal infections?\
"BillyJoe adovates for giving EVERY newborn the Hep B vaccine!"
Yes, amazing hey? I advocate for a measure that has reduced the prevalence of Hep B infection from 5% to <1%, and that has resulted in a 72% decrease in deaths from hepatic failure, cirrhosis, and cancer caused by the HBV.
"Yeah, just another dose of injected aluminum. "'
Which increases the effect and duration of the vaccinations thereby reducing the dose of antigen in the vaccine and the number of doses required to achieve lasting immunity while using a dose of aluminium that does not detectably increase blood levels and that is less than that obtained from breast milk
"no one really knows the safety of these vaccines"
The safety of all vaccines has been firmly established via Phase I, II, and III clinical trials, pharmacovigilance studies, and post marketing surveillance.
"Bye bye"
Yeah, Fv<k off, you lying piece of human homoeopathic trash.
A lifetime of killing people with misinformation and with a stupid brain-dead water treatment for everything.
Sorry...but that "meta-analysis" did NOT test for short- or long-term safety. The first trial supposed tested for safety but there was no information on how long they evaluated the newborns. Neurological effects require evaluation after several years.
Good try...but you're deluding yourself (and others).
Gad...are you REALLY that daft? My MPH is a masters in public health from UC Berkeley. In fact, UC Berkeley is so proud of me that the alumni magazine, which interviews its top scientists and Nobelists, interviewed me for four pages back in 1999. https://homeopathic.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/scan0010.pdf Thanx for giving me an opportunity to brag. As for you, what did your Community College or Elementary School brag about you? #LOL
The first trial clearly states safety and reactions were evaluated out to 21 days post vaccination. Didn’t you read it?
You claim the metanalysis (why did you put the term into quotes?) didn’t check for short term or long term safety.
Do you even understand what a metanalysis is? It comprises a number of comparable studies eligible for outcome analysis using predetermined quality and methodological criteria. The individual studies (if you bothered to look at them) looked at safety signals for a varying length of time.
The overall recommendation was that longer term studies would be useful, but no adverse safety signals were seen.
What is it you think these Hepatitis vaccines might do to an infant, Dana? When do you think most adverse reactions are reported? (Answer…they are short term events within the first few weeks only). Long term issues like autism co7ld require RCTS going out for several years. You have an MPH, I believe? Did Berkeley not explain that the best way to look at those type of outcomes is a case-controlled study, and not a prospective RCT? …tut tut, how remiss of them. Maybe yo7 missed lectures the week they expounded on study methodology.
I guess you think using words with many syllables makes you impressive. Yet you can't even refute what you know to be true. And put on your big boy pants...you can write the word "fuck". As in Jay Kanta is a fuck-wad. See? Not that hard.
Thanx for promoting me and my website. Since you've said some disparaging comments about me, below is my simple response:
Actually, for people who want access to the 500+ clinical trials testing homeopathic medicine that were published in peer-review medical journals, you'll benefit from my ebook "Evidence Based Homeopathic Family Medicine." These studies were published in The Lancet, BMJ, Pediatrics, European Journal of Pediatrics, Pediatrics Infectious Disease Journal, PlOsOne, Cancer, The Oncologist, Chest, Rheumatology, and others.
"that were published in peer-review medical journals"
You mean that were published by other quacks and grifters with no real knowledge of science or scientific methods, sure. "Peers" is doing some heavy lifting, there. Your peers aren't scientists, just like you aren't a scientist. You don't know how to design a proper RCT, you use testimonials in your "studies" and you don't know how repeatability and validation are the essence of scientific research.
Here's the silly homoeopath, Dull Man, back again. You've got to laugh when antivaxxers claim among their ranks, a dull man who thinks water is a cure for everything. Fitting, of course, because all antivaxxers are science illiterate and cognitively impaired like our sad dull man.
Poor ole BillyJoe...he only knows how to attack via ad hominems. That is what happens when a person doesn't have any substantive to say. He has a problem that I reference homeopathic research that has been published in many of the highest caliber medical journals. Yeah, you can understand why he is only able to attack me with personal attacks.
The incredibly dense Dull Man only knows how to lie:
"[BillyJoe] only knows how to attack via ad hominems"
I smacked you down with knowledge and facts, arsehole.
THEN I kicked you in the arse in a well-deserved personal attack.
There is no excuse, morally or ethically, to fooling people into giving you money in exchange for your useless homoeopathic water "treatments". It is a brain-dead concept by brain-dead idiots like you preying on the unsuspecting public who desperately need to be protected from lying grifting arseholes like you.
Hey Dullman, did you ever stop to think that you regard Dr Setty’s response to Offit as “excellent” because you are a bit on the dim side, and can’t distinguish fact from fiction and supposition?
Here you are saying: “It is remarkable that Dr. Offit complains about ONE infant who died from Hepatitis B because he wasn't vaccinated against it...but that was at a time BEFORE women in labor were tested for Hep B.”
Yet Setty himself says the mother was positive for Hep B….SO WAS HE LYING, …OR ARE YOU??
Setty tries to imply that there is a one in a thousand chance that the vaccine would prevent a case of Hep B. But this mother was Hep B positive, and there is a 100% certainty the child would catch Hep B during birth/delivery/breast feeding. In that situation, giving Hep B vaccine to the child immediately after delivery prevents Hep B in 95% of cases where the mother is positive for HBsAg but eAg negative, and 50% effective where the mother is sag and eAg positive (the most infectious subset).
So in the case mentioned by Offit depriving the infant of vaccine very probably led to the child becoming infected.
I'll have to read up on Dr. Setty. I don't recognize him. I'm saying that Dullman is incredibly pathetic. He really has a huge ego and no real skill in science. His inability to recognize his own limitations is why he's so confident and unfortunately, successful at grifting.
RFK Jr's book titled, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak (in which the science never actually spoke)...Dr. Offit well stated as per your many comments.
Those wanting more details on the objective & scientific facts of methyl cf Ethylmercury can review the Substack post from Dr. Andrea Love 👍
The egregious actions of RFK Jr & other sycophants of the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave are beyond hypocritical given the consequences 😥
MAHA...healthy, your healthcare system is in complete disarray, compounded by the strain on the system prior to the actions of those above.
Allowing for the inaccurate presentation of thimerosal at the recent ACIP meeting, should be grounds for RFK Jr's resignation.
DOGE, the annunciation of which may have the vannier of something 'romantic', there is nothing to be embraced from the actions of those who orchestrated the decimation of USAID 😥😥
Why should I care? The events unfolding in the US are **wrong** on multiple levels/fronts. Citizens of the USA can disagree with the policies of any "administration", however there can be no disputing the bully, buffoon is orchestrating one of the most tragic chapters in American history. ☹️
JJF Phm 🇨🇦
"Dr. Andrea Love 👍"
One of the few scientists who has recognised there is a war against science and that the enemy is winning and laying down the law and that scientists need to push back forcefully to defend science against ignorant, antivax arseholes.
Thank you, Paul, for constantly providing data and context -- and for your efforts to counter the Alice-in-Wonderland administration and its allies
have you read the information about thimerasol and vaccines on the Children’s Health Defense website? Really good articles and podcasts
Thanks for continuing to be the most eloquent voice on this and keeping it top of mind when it’s easy to be distracted by so much else going on. The children cannot be forgotten!
Excellent read. Thank you as always, Dr. Offit.
Thank you so much for this excellent, concise post. I look forward to reading your posts every week.
I support Kennedy and have worked for Children's Health Defense in the past. I am a doctor with no training in epidemiology or infectious disease. How and why would someone like me decide to support him?
It's not because I was seduced by his messaging. It's not because I am stupid. It's because I am a father first. Just as important, it's because of posts like these from folks who are the spokespersons for the medical establishment. While Kennedy may not be a doctor he doesn't misrepresent information the way Dr. Offit does here. Paul is a smart fellow. I don't for one second believe that he believes what he is saying.
I will break down Dr. Offit's lapses in logic and lack of coherence.
Taking thimerosal out of multi-dose vials is a mistake, because Offit says, it would lead to cellulitis, abscesses and blood stream infections because that's what happened in the days before preservatives. Agreed. These can be avoided in two ways: stop using multidose vials, or put other, safer "preservatives" in the formulation.
I don't inject children with vaccines. I am an anesthesiologist, so I do my fair share of injecting things into people on a daily basis. When we are injecting anesthetic into the most vulnerable parts of a patient's body, like the epidural space or the intrathecal space (which bathes the spinal chord and brain) we never, ever inject anything with preservatives. Why? Because they are toxic at some level. They are designed to prevent the growth of bacteria, i.e. they kill living organisms. That's why we keep them away from nerve cells.
So Paul is saying that it would be okay to leave thimerosal in vaccines and give them to millions of children? Why? Why not just eliminate multidose vials? Is it too expensive for our kids?
Next, Offit subtly substitutes thimerosal with "preservatives". Is he really advocating for a derivative of what is arguably the most neurotoxic element to be given to children when alternatives exist?
Then Offit attacks the AAP for advocating for the removal of thimerosal from the DTaP, Hep-B and HiB vaccines because they kowtowed to the "antivaccine" movement. Okay. What happened next? Was there an outbreak of abscesses and infections like he predicted would happen? No there wasn't. So no harm done. Why didn't he mention this if that is his argument?
Instead he points to a single case of a baby who died with fulminant hepatitis-B 26 years ago because the facility where the child was born was concerned about the thimerosal in the Hep-B vaccine. How do we know that the vaccine would have prevented the death? We don't know that. In fact, the number of children needed to be vaccinated to prevent a single infant mortality in this country is far greater than 1,000. The vaccine is good, but it is not perfect and it doesn't help every child who gets it.
In this case, the child was born to a mother who tested positive for Hep-B and would have probably benefited from having their baby vaccinated. The hospital was unaware of her positive serology test. But Offit cannot state that vaccination would have saved this child in particular. That requires a vaccine that is 100% effective. Right now, over 90% of infants are vaccinated for Hep-B. That still means that there are millions of kids who never received the vaccine. Yet there are virtually no infant mortalities from Hep-B.
Offit states that "antivaxx" people "pounced" when the FDA investigated the use of thimerosal in medical products in 1997. "No one more so than Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who wrote a book titled, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak (in which the science never actually spoke)."
Paul, the problem here is that that book was written in 2014, 17 years after the FDA took action. You've got the entire timeline wrong. Neither did he write the book himself. It was co-authored by MDs, one of which is a pediatric neurologist whom I know personally. And yes, they cited tons of science, including epidemiological patterns, cellular and animal studies and CDC funded studies that all suggested harm from thimerosal. You are blatantly misrepresenting the facts.
Offit then says that there are "about ten" studies that show no harm. But these studies weren't designed to investigate "harm", they were designed to test the hypothesis that thimerosal was linked to autism. It is true that they didn't show a link to autism. What is interesting about most of them is that the incidence of autism INCREASED after thimerosal was removed.
What does this mean? That mercury derived preservatives in vaccines prevent autism? Of course not. It means that the study was confounded by other factors. Could it be an increase in the number of vaccines children were exposed to during the observational period? Maybe. Uh-oh...
On the same page (which takes you to a PSA page from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia where I also trained) the reader is treated to more information is given "in support "of the safety of mercury. There was an incident in Iraq in 1971 where people at grains fumigated with mercury. Thousands were hospitalized, 450 people died. Pregnant mothers who ate these products did NOT have children with an increased risk of autism. (Phew!)
They did, however give birth to babies who had epilepsy and mental retardation at higher rates. So it's okay to inject these derivatives but not eat them? Nothing to see here...
Offit then rehashes a specious argument that "studies had shown that the level of mercury in the bloodstream doesn’t change after receiving thimerosal-containing vaccines". This is particularly intriguing. Kennedy tells of a conversation with Offit on this specific topic years ago when Paul cited this particular evidence of safety.
The question that Kennedy posed, which Dr. Offit never answered, is so what happened to the mercury? How do we know that some of it doesn't leave the bloodstream and accumulate in the tissues and brain? Bobby said that Paul never answered the question, and they never had another direct conversation again.
Would you care to answer that Dr. Offit? Do you have a study that you can cite which looks at mercury concentrations in the brains of children who suffered neurodevelopmental disorders after receiving thimerosal containing vaccines? Or is this the reason why you declined to ever have another public conversation with the Secretary of HHS?
Lastly, Offit cites Kennedy's "lengthy history of suing vaccine makers for false claims of harm". Which lawsuits Paul? To my knowledge Kennedy has only sued Merck for the harms caused by their HPV vaccine. That suit is yet to be adjudicated, so you have no grounds to call them "false claims of harm". In any case, are you opposed to holding vaccine manufacturers accountable if there is sufficient evidence that their products cause harm in specific cases? We both know that the Vaccine Injury Compensation fund has paid out over $5 billions dollars to over ten thousand families with children who have suffered devastating injury from these products. You are okay with letting the public foot the bill for these injuries?
Children's Health Defense has brought a number of lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers during the pandemic but Kennedy is not directly involved with those cases. He is has not been affiliated with this organization for over two years.
This post is more Vaccine Industry propaganda from their biggest spokesperson which can be dismantled in just a few minutes of cross checking his claims.
It's amazing that you would even write a post like this, Paul. Are you really advocating for putting thimerosal back into vaccines? Why on Earth would you want that? There are alternatives. There is no necessity for this. There hasn't been the explosion of infections since thimerosal was pulled from most vaccines.
When you attack people like Lyn Redwood who is a nurse practitioner who has been digging into the data and studies for decades and has cared for a child with neurodevelopmental issues immediately following inoculation with thimerosal containing vaccines you are losing all credibility as an advocate for children's health.
This is why more and more people and those with medical training are backing the referendum on vaccines and a revamping of the regulatory agencies.
Okay Billie-Joe. We are ready to hear your thoughtful counter arguments...
Don't bother reading this deadly lying bullshit from Madhava "Mad Dog" Setty.
He copy-pastes everything from his disinformation dump and never responds.
The fv<ker is part of the killing field known as the Children's Health Destruction.
Is Lawrence General allowing you to do cases again? Not what I heard.
When thimerosal was removed from the vaccine production in 1999/2000, it was not replaced with alternative preservatives, but production moved to single dose, preservative-free vaccine (including the Hep B). Remaining vials of vaccines with thimerosal were supposed to be "used up" to avoid wastage, but most medical organisations were reluctant to use them. Initially supplies of Hep B vavccine were sometimes compromised by this reluctance to give or to receive the "old" thimerosal containing vaccine. Cost of vaccine greatly increased, further compromising availability, and third world countries had significant delays during the transition.
You agree that thimerosal as a preservative will eliminate bacterial and fungal contamination of multidose vials, but say that there is no evidence that thimerosal did reduce infection because when it was removed infection rates did not rise....but you would not expect there to be a rise in infections because the switch was to single dose sterile vials. They didn't just continue to use multidose vials without any preservative [your implication]...that would have been pretty stupid.
(I think I'm right in saying there *was* an increase in soft tissue infections in children after 2000 or so, but that was primarily driven by community MRSA prevalence increase, and probably not because of the elimination of thimerosal from vaccines).
"The question that Kennedy posed, which Dr. Offit never answered, is so what happened to the mercury?"
Thimerosal rapidly undergoes hydrolysis once it enters the body, breaking down into ethylmercury and thiosalicylate. Ethyl mercury is conjugated in the liver, and excreted in the bile and urine. It's half life is between one to two weeks.
Ethyl mercury can cross the blood brain barrier, but in small quantities and animal studies show it is eliminated within a few days. Methyl merculy readily crosses into the brain since it is lipophilic; ethyl mercury not so much.
These references will fill in the detail:
The pharmacokinetics of thimerosal in humans: A review of the literature.
Michael J. D. Chisholm, A. E. Noren, R. G. Rich
Thimerosal and vaccines: A review of the literature
Authors: R. S. F. Hopkins, A. L. Z. Sweeney
Safety of Vaccines and Thimerosal: A Review of the Evidence
Authors: T. M. Miller, G. L. Nelson
Mercury Exposure and Health Effects: A Review of the Literature
Authors: B. A. Nuttall, H. M. Patrick
Ethylmercury from Thimerosal: A Review of Safety Issues and Risks
L. L. Giroux, P. L. Miller
Dr Setty, you say: "We both know that the Vaccine Injury Compensation fund has paid out over $5 billions dollars to over ten thousand families with children who have suffered devastating injury from these products. You are okay with letting the public foot the bill for these injuries?"
FYI the compensation paid out by the vaccine court (NVICP) is indicative of succesful claims for vaccine damage, where the onus of proof of causation has been lifted from the plaintiff. All that they have to do to get compensation is to show that the child had a condition that is on the tabled list of possible vaccine complications...they don't need to prove the vaccine caused the condition. For example, if a child developed intussusception within 3 months of a rotavirus vaccine, compensation will be paid even if the problem was caused by something else. For claims of damage not listed on the table, then they will have to persuade the court that the vaccine was responsible "on the balance of probabilities" (and not "beyond all reasonable doubt" which is the standard in Tort claims. So the bar for compensation is set much lower than you might expect.
The court has compensated 6,800 families between 1986 and 2021, not "over ten thousand". This represents one successful claim per 100,00 vaccine doses administered. The commonest condition was GBS in 20-25% of successful claims, followed by allergy/anaphylaxis (20%).
The funding for the VICP and the compensation, and ALL legal fees for plaintiffs (even for unsuccessful claims) is NOT footed by the public. It is paid for by a an excise tax levied on the vaccine manufacturers for each vaccine component, at a rate of 75c per component (so a single MMR vaccine shot would raise $2.25 in tax for the VICP fund).
Why is "attacking" someone like Lyn Redwood for presenting vaccine disinformation at an ACIP meeting (which is a highly important forum for discussions and guidance on vaccine issues, and a forum that Dr Offit himself attended many times over the years) so awful that it would "lose [Offit's] credibility? She has far less expertise in these topics than does Dr Offit.
You have attacked Dr Offit...may I say that has lost you your credibility? ...I think I can.
With apologies to kitty kat:
Thanks, Mike, I have already corrected Mad Dog Setty's previous copy-pastes but he never responds. He just comes back and repeats the lies like a rubber duck that have to be drowned over and over again.
The fv<ker does not respond because he knows the dags hanging off his arse hairs following him around will only read his comments.
Excellent response. It’s disturbing to see so many professionals too furious to respond respectfully and with good information. Personally I got more from this than Offits piece.
You can do both, kitty kat.
Honestly the fury just indicates rigidity which suggests there is far too much enforced group think. It’s no wonder then that public confidence is shaken. No science that involves complex systems is absolute. As well, given concentration of power today, In the case of vaccines one can never ignore the gigantic industry behind them.
"fury just indicates rigidity"
This will sound ironic, but you need to be more flexible in your thinking. Fury can indicate many things.
Firstly, there is more than one way to skin a cat. Secondly, there are situations in which respect can backfire by giving an idiot a seat at the table that they do not deserve. I also get the impression you have not dealt with antivaxxers long enough to know how deceitful they are and how much they crave to be accepted . And now that they have this acceptance by the present regime in the US, they have literally become insufferable arseholes, sorry,
And fury can also indicate passion, a passion based on knowledge and understanding of science and an abhorrence of those who lack that knowledge and understanding and spread misinformation that kills - in this case infants and young children.
"No science that involves complex systems is absolute"
Science itself is never absolute, but that does not mean that some arseholes who talk about science are quite simply wrong. And antivaxxers ARE, quite simply, wrong
"one can never ignore the gigantic industry behind them."
Indeed. I am on record here as advocating for maximum government regulation of the pharmaceutical industry and maximum fines for failing to abide by those regulations. Interestingly, I have yet to see any of the antivaxxers here agree with me. You know why? They are against government regulation. It's a large part of the reason that they are antivax!
What occurred during Covid effectively collapsed trust. Those products rely on public trust and industry/government/military operation did not engender trust and was actually abusive. Now skepticism is spreading which is understandable.
Why bother?
Why bother?
Because ignoring antivaxxers over the past 20 years has resulted in what we see today in the US. Antivaxxers in power laying down the law. Before the pandemic most medical scientists and most medical practitioners were what we referred to as "shruggies": why bother?
Mike, clearly you are well informed. An "insider" to the data. I have spent half my adult life reading more than 10,000 pages of material. Facts. So, I commend you for your posting. There is where I draw the line. Were you cross examined, likely you would be asked:
1) Given the stipulation that Ethyl Hg CAN cross the blood brain barrier, is it predictable, based on the dose and the weight of an infant, can you say whether or not brain injury is plausible? Does every infant "clear" the poison equally.
2) Does the cumulative effects of Ethyl Hg from multi dose vials matter?
3) Why hasn't autism been listed as a "table injury" by the USCFC in the VICP?
Remember a lawyer neve asks any questions for which he/she does not already know the answers. The jury needs to hear this in a Court of Law. Our Justice system is one which due process must prevail.
For the record, you made one factual mistake above. A civil suit does NOT require "beyond a reasonable doubt." In tort claims, the standard of proof required is a "preponderance of the evidence."
Thank you
Thanks for your correction on “beyond reasonable doubt”. It’s my UK side kicking in.
Autism isn’t caused by vaccines so it isn’t categorised as a table injury. However encephalitis and encephalopathy are ( these can complicate some vaccines, particularly live virus vaccines)
Ethyl mercury is considered to be around 50 times less toxic than methyl mercury, which can also be cumulative. I gather that based on animal studies it also clears much more rapidly from organs including the brain around 10 times faster than methyl mercury.
Brain injury from ethyl mercury is plausible, but would require a significant metabolic defect to preexist (likely a genetic syndrome) and I am unaware of one such in humans. In real terms, exposure through other prevalent sources of mercury such as diet, air and water would dwarf the quantity delivered by TCVs.
To put into context, a pregnant woman is allowed to eat up to 2-3 servings of skipjack tuna per week (20mcg methyl mercury per serving).
This Me Hg is around 95% absorbed, so over 9 months a woman could theoretically absorb 40 x 50mcg x 95% = 1,900mcg METHYL mercury.
She might currently be offered one flu jab with 25mcg of ETHYL mercury, and even then she would likely opt for the thimerosal free version.
You see the problem?
It isn’t thimerosal.
Getting rid of multidose TCVs which comprise less than 5% of the flu vaccine market is merely a frothy distraction. Rather like thinking that getting rid of plastic straws is going to save the planet.
Mike. My infant/toddler son received every single possible inoculation from a multi-dose vial. ( where the routine childhood schedule called for a vaccine that was indicated). We were never aware or offered any alternative. As you know, this would allow one to calculate the MCg delivered.
"Autism" is consistently used as a catch all phrase here in the U.S. We proffered such in Court pleadings we had planned. Unfortunately, when forced to the USCFC, our case was dismissed on the 36 month statute of limitations. Not sure what they say in UK, but this is a "catch-22." Better still, the fix was in. USCFC is a "kangaroo Court." Not one designed to compensate one from injury.
P.S. The whole point of the "phony" Omnibus Autism Hearings here in U.S. was to prevent the diagnosis "autism" from being a table injury. Doctors were unable to immediately diagnose the high fever, let alone most report to VAERS that an adverse event even occured. "Autism" was ( in 1994) rarely even "spoken."
None of my comments herein are meant to be a "distraction" nor a social commentary on vaccines writ large. My goal is for our due process rights to be recognized and for us to be able to seek relief for our son's injuries.
It will be a very large sum. The Phrma lobby has made certain that they not pay for this tragedy for as long as possible.
Thank you for being civil. Maybe that's "UK kicking in." My wife is a Canadian. I am usually not so nice!
You have my sympathies for your situation and travails.
In the early 90s, the total mercury quantity in the childhood schedule would have been 175mcg; if Hep B is added in it would be 212.5mcg.
Of course, thimerosal is not the only concern, but from my perspective aluminium from adjuvants is a similar case…the quantity delivered is less than most usual environmental and dietary exposures, even calculating for the low oral absorbtion.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(03)12573-1/fulltext
Hatters were negatively affected by inorganic mercury nitrate (which, like all nitrates is fully soluble in water), but even that took time to develop. Also, I suspect that during those times children were exposed to the compound as well.
I don't have the education & training nor knowledge of the factual history referenced to counter most of your argument(s), however is there direct evidence the tragic events stated with respect to Ms. Redwood 's child were the result of the vaccine the child received or what I offer is more likely a tragic coincidence.
JJF Phm 🇨🇦
Thank you for this reply Dr. Setty.
This is a victim of antivax bullshit falling down on her knees in adoration of a fv<king lying arsehole.
As embarrassing as hell.
"I am an anesthesiologist, so I do my fair share of injecting things into people on a daily basis."
You've been off the inpatient surgery schedule for years already. But I'm sure that you're milking outpatients with good insurance.
What we're witnessing in the irate responses to Dr. Setty is mainly a blend of "parental users' bias" and "buyers' remorse" (courtesy of US tax dollars). Parents who have allowed their children to be injected with a known neurotoxin, a substance that can lead to a range of neurological problems, will be disinclined to take responsibility and to consider reasonable alternatives. Why would we need a mercury-based additive, the primary purpose of which is to allow for multiple vaccinations (far beyond the number necessary), including a routine shot for hepatitis B in babies who are at virtually zero risk of HBV infection? Interesting to note that Offit uses a rare case of death by HBV as an example of how aversion to thimerasol can result in death. Where is the risk-benefit analysis for such an extremely biased example?
Another Madhava "mad dog" Setty brown noser.
Correction of the science illiteracy of this freak boy:
1) The dose is the poison.
2) Vaccinations are far less of a risk than the infectious diseases they prevent.
3) Vaccinations save 3 million lives every year.
4) Scientists look for better alternatives all the time.
5) Mercury in vaccines is to prevent infection at injection sites which can lead to septicaemia.
6) The birth dose of Hep B vaccine reduced prevalence of Hep B infection in children under the age of 5 from nearly 5% to les then 1%, and reduced death from chronic hepatitis, hepatic failure and hepatic cancer by 72%.
LEARN SOME SCIENCE.
Precisely correct. This is a classic example of using cherry picked examples of morbidity from infectious disease to argue for universal vaccination with no consideration of the risks and limited effectiveness of these measures.
And, as you pointed out, the tenor of the responses point to something painful and irrational.
Madhava "mad dog" Setty <-- "painful and irrational"
And painfully irrational
This kind of irrational behavior was to be expected when RFK, Jr., exposed a CDC study (previously concealed) showing an approximate 1100% increase in autism in association with the HBV vaccine. Offit needs to be able to sleep at night.
This ignorant and gullible "Biologist & Public Health Scientist", M.N. Mead, is either a lying arsehole or an ignorant buffoon.
Here are the facts:
The claim comes from a 1999 analysis by CDC scientist Thomas Verstraeten, who examined data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink. In early drafts, there was a reported 1135% increased risk of autism among children who received the HBV vaccine within the first 30 days of life compared to those who received it later or not at all. However, the data was preliminary and unadjusted for confounding factors and, when it was, the association disappeared. Subsequently multiple large-scale studies, including those from Denmark and the U.S., have found no causal link between vaccines and autism. Both the Institute of Medicine and World Health Organization have reviewed the evidence and concluded that vaccines do not cause autism.
LEARN SOME SCIENCE OR QUIT THE FIELD, SON.
I would appreciate you citing this previously concealed study indicating a 1100% increase in autism associated with HBV vaccination if you would be so kind.
I am presuming that, if you felt justified in raising this issue as a "Biologist & Public Health Scientist," which I can only gather must presume certain ethical assumptions, you are able to provide a reasonable citation to substantiate your claim, and likewise justify Dr. Setty's endorsement. Otherwise, I will presume you are nothing more than simply another anti-vaccination advocate spreading more "mythology." I sincerely hope that is not the case. Perhaps Dr. Setty can bail you out without waking Dr. Offit?
I'm sorry that this is such a difficult issue. When RFK, Jr. highlighted a CDC study showing a 1,135% elevated risk of autism among children receiving the HBV vaccine, many MDs were immensely upset, particularly those who had been dolling out the shots with gusto & abandon (with pediatricians incentivized to the tune of $200-$600 per patient). Kennedy said the CDC tried to hide the study’s findings using statistical trickery, and frankly I believe him. I've seen so much scientific dishonesty over the past 5 years that it's par for the course.. By the way, the original CDC study was led by Belgian researcher Thomas Verstraeten.
You might want to check out my recent paper published in the International Journal of Cardiovascular Research & Innovation.
https://cardiovascular-research-and-innovation.reseaprojournals.com/Articles/myocarditis-after-sars-cov-2-infection-and-covid-19-vaccination-epidemiology-outcomes-and-new-perspectives
Keep on presuming but also try to maintain an open yet skeptical mind. I'll post the documentation for this re-analysis of the Verstraeten et al. research once it's released.
And you might want to check out these "new perspectives" regarding the relationship between cardiovascular research and innovation as well:
Hromi´c-Jahjefendic, A, et al. COVID-19 Vaccines and Myocarditis: An Overview of Current Evidence. Biomedicines 2023, 11, 1469. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11051469
Conclusions: The safety and efficacy of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have been examined in extensive clinical studies. Myocarditis and pericarditis have been mentioned in rare cases as adverse effects in several investigations. In clinical studies for the BNT162b2 vaccine, myocarditis and pericarditis were found in roughly 0.02% and 0.01% of vaccine recipients, respectively. The mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine also showed that about 0.03% of recipients experienced myocarditis, and about 0.01% experienced pericarditis in clinical trials... In summary, the current COVID-19 vaccines have clearly demonstrated efficacy and undoubtedly proved that the benefits overweigh the risks by a big margin. However, it cannot be denied that adverse events, although at a low frequency, including the development of myocarditis, have been documented in vaccinated individuals. Due to the global administration of more than 13.3 billion COVID-19 vaccine, doses it is not unexpected for adverse events to occur. For this reason, it is important that clinicians monitor any symptoms developed after vaccinations with current COVID-19 vaccines.
Pillay, J, et al. Incidence, risk factors, natural history, and hypothesised mechanisms of myocarditis and pericarditis following covid-19 vaccination: living evidence syntheses and review. the bmj | BMJ 2022;378:e069445 | doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-069445.
As the incidence of myocarditis after mRNA vaccination is a rare adverse event, the findings must be considered alongside the overall benefits of vaccination and with detailed risk-benefit analyses to support policy recommendations for optimal dosing intervals and vaccine products for different populations. As the covid-19 pandemic enters its third year, continued surveillance of myocarditis after mRNA vaccines, especially in younger ages, after dose three (and subsequent doses) and in previous cases is needed to support continued decision making for covid-19 boosters. Additional monitoring of populations with clinical comorbidities of interest (eg, cardiac conditions, previous myocarditis,
immunocompromised, etc) is also needed to inform on best practices. Long term follow-up of patients with myocarditis is needed to better understand the natural history including disease recurrence. Finally, multicentre prospective studies with appropriate testing (eg, biopsy, tissue morphology) will enhance understanding of the mechanism or mechanisms of myocarditis and pericarditis after vaccination. This understanding will help to identify and guide recommendations for those who might be at higher risk.
Patone, M, et al. Risk of Myocarditis After Sequential Doses of COVID-19 Vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 Infection by Age and Sex. Circulation. 2022;146:743–754. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.059970
First, the risk of myocarditis is substantially higher after SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated individuals than the increase in risk observed after a first dose of ChAdOx1nCoV-19 vaccine, and a first, second, or booster dose of BNT162b2 vaccine. Second, although the risk of myocarditis with SARS-CoV-2 infection remains after vaccination, it was substantially reduced, suggesting vaccination provides some protection from the cardiovascular consequences of SARS-CoV-2The risk of vaccine-associated myocarditis is small, with up to an additional 2 events per million people in the 28-day period after exposure to all vaccine doses other than mRNA-1273. This is substantially lower than the 35 additional myocarditis events observed with SARS-CoV-2 infection before vaccination. Furthermore, vaccination reduced the risk of infection associated myocarditis by approximately half, suggesting that the prevention of infection associated myocarditis may be an additional longer-term benefit of vaccination.
In summary, the risk of hospital admission or death from myocarditis is greater after SARS-CoV2 infection than COVID-19 vaccination and remains modest after sequential doses including a booster dose of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. However, the risk of myocarditis after vaccination is higher in younger men, particularly after a second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine.
Patone, M, et al. Risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, and cardiac arrhythmias associated with COVID-19 vaccination or SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nature Medicine | VOL 28 | February 2022 | 410–422 | www.nature.com/naturemedicine.
Whilst myocarditis can be life-threatening, most vaccine-associated myocarditis events have been mild and self-limiting The risk observed here is small and confined to the 7-day period following vaccination, whereas the lifetime risk of morbidity and mortality following SARS-CoV-2 infection is substantial. Indeed, myocardial injury is very common in persons admitted to hospital with SARS-CoV-2 infection26, when evaluated systematically using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin tests27. Moreover, evidence of myocardial injury, irrespective of whether due to myocarditis or myocardial ischemia, is associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death. We estimate that the absolute number of excess myocarditis events in the 28 days following a first dose of adenovirus or mRNA vaccine is between one and six per million persons vaccinated, and the excess risk following the second dose of the mRNA-1283 vaccine is ten per million. By contrast, we estimate 40 excess myocarditis events per million in the 28 days following SARS-CoV-2 infection. The risks are more evenly balanced in younger persons aged up to 40 years, where we estimated the excess in myocarditis events following SARS-CoV-2 infection to be 10 per million with the excess following a second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine being 15 per million. Further research is required to understand why the risk of myocarditis seems to be higher following mRNA-1273 vaccine. Although the wider societal benefits of controlling the spread of virus to those who are more vulnerable are substantial, these data may help inform public health policy and the choice of vaccine offered to younger adults.
In summary, this population-based study quantifies for the first time the risk of several rare cardiac adverse events associated with three COVID-19 vaccines as well as SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination for SARS-CoV-2 in adults was associated with a small increase in the risk of myocarditis within a week of receiving the first dose of both adenovirus and mRNA vaccines, and after the second dose of both mRNA vaccines. By contrast, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a substantial increase in the risk of hospitalization or death from myocarditis, pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmia.
I would add that I left several comments on Peter McCollough's site questioning why he never addresses the point of the greater probability of contracting myocarditis directly from SARS-CoV-2 disease than any Covid-19 vaccine. I have never received a response.
This is not a "previously concealed" study indicating a massive, inordinate increase in ASD related to HBV, for which you have no documented evidence whatsoever. You have only compounded your misrepresentation by further claims of Sec. Kennedy and claims of "scientific dishonesty," which you likewise have provide no documentation. Instead you provide a paper - no better than a single, ridiculous opinion, which is contrary to a much larger body of trustworthy research opinion, discussed ad nauseam on this blog, had you taken the time to investigate before insulting me.
I would suggest to you that, as a physician and researcher, I, for one, simply do not need to be lectured by someone obviously intent on confusing the issues, as to my responsibility to "remain skeptical" and open minded as a scientist. Period.
Meady Reader
https://substack.com/@mnmead910772/reads
Lessons on rational thinking, with this reading list; https://substack.com/@mnmead910772/reads
😂
The ones who cherrypick and manipulate morbidity and mortality charts are the antivaxers, and CHD is among them. Pure disinformation calculated to paint vaccines in the worst possible light.
I agree the tenor of responses to this disinformation can be painful, but they are not irrational; it is the rational, reasonable individuals who are so fed up with trying to constantly refute the fire-hosed antivax propaganda that they sometimes resort to invective. But sometimes that’s the only thing that can get people’s attention.
It’s all a matter of dose and pharmacokinetics. Everything is “toxic” given the right circumstances.
Do you berate people who give Botox injections for using a deadly neurotoxin? If not, why not?
Bobby's "going wild on healthcare." The people running things don't care about the details. The undermining of institutions and "expertise" is the point. The public's outrage and apololexy are welcomed, as are the cultust's adulation and glee. Only he can save us. All that came before were corrupt (globalists), and so on.
Thank you for enlightening us to erosion of vaccines for their personal gain. Have enjoyed hearing you at state conferences and reading the information you provide to us. Please keep providing the science. ❤️
Who would have thought that a whole health system could be corrupted this way? 🤯🤬Thanks for a thoughtful and factual analysis 🙏
If we can’t get enough flu vaccine this year for all the hospital staff who need it, we’ll all be back to wearing masks again. Staff will have to wear them all day everyday and patients will have to when they come to the office. Some patients will be grateful, some will be furious and refuse. So some patients won’t come in who should be seen because they’re afraid of the non-compliars. Some staff, including nurses like me, will refuse to see patients who don’t comply, or just quit/retire, making access harder for everyone. History will repeat itself. This is what happened during COVID in many states.
I still remember the early days when you were all regarded as national heroes.
The way that changed was horrible to witness, as if killing people wasn't enough, they had to target those trying to save their lives as well. I can understand the frustration and burn out but don't let the bastards win.
Thank you. Ah yes, the 7:00 applause. Also, my colleague walking into a patient room to find a family member just about to pour ivermectin into their ventilator tubing. This was 2021 when limited visitors were allowed back. I’m nearly 64, time for me to retire anyway. People should be aware that no or little flu and COVID vaccine + Medicaid cuts (and even the threat of them coming) = much reduced access to care for EVERYONE especially in rural areas. Take care out there!
It's a difficult situation in the US. Here we have universal health care and agreement by both major parties and the most popular minor party regarding vaccinations and a general sense by the population that it is better to cooperate with expertise than listen to grifting social media gurus.
I’m very happy for you! Maybe someday we’ll have some of that here. The universal healthcare would be long overdue.
Only a tiny amount of thimerosal is present in the multidose vaccine formulations, and post-injection, it is diluted in the body tissues to minuscule levels. More significantly, while methylmercury in fish and mercuric salts in the environment have high bioavailability in humans (most of the mercury gets into the circulation), the ethylmercury in Thimerosal is not in a free state but rather covalently linked to a salicylic acid. The mercury is therefore not bioavailable, such that little to none or it gets into the brain. As a biologist I believe that assigning a single event as the root cause of neurodiversity is far too simplistic given the complexity of human biology in general, and neurodevelopment in particular. It is far more likely that neurodiversity is the result of developmental processes that begin in utero.
Methyl Mercury and dimethyl mercury are significantly more toxic than ethyl mercury.
You repeated what he said in simpler terms, that's all.
That ethylmercury is not freely taken up by cells and deposited in tissues is why it's not nearly as toxic.
Ethyl Hg is still "toxic." Less dangerous is not a legal standard. Multiple injections deliver sufficient micrograms can accumulate and to do permanent damage. We can prove this. But, our government decided that Phrma should be shielded from liability. That is indefensible.
Correction of the lies of this science illiterate antivaxxer:
1) The dose is the poison
This means everything is "toxic" if the dose is high enough. Drink 5 litres of water within a few hours and you risk death. It also means that everything in NOT "toxic" if the dose is low enough. The dose of ethyl mercury in vaccines is NOT "toxic".
2) The dose of ethyl mercury is not "less dangerous", it is below the level at which it could cause harm. The dose is the poison.
3) It is true that if "sufficient micrograms accumulate it can do damage. The doses employed in the vaccines are NOT sufficient to do this, not by a long shot. The dose is the poison.
4) Pharmaceutical companies are NOT shielded from liability. That is a blatant unadulterated lie that does not become true because ignorant antivaxxers like this one keep repeating that blatant unadulterated lie.
You are still just a moronic liar With no evidence and no education.
The pharmaceutical companies are NOT shielded from liability, you need to read the relevant legislation and what it entails for the vaccine recipients,the federal government and the pharmaceutical companies. If it did shield pharmaceutical companies from liability then a certain lawyer in the current administration would not have been able to try and sue them.
I am aware of all of the statutes surrounding the NCVIA of 1986. The conditions to be met, etc. We have been represented by one of the nation's largest mass tort plaintiff's attorneys, one of the most prominent firms that practice at USCFC and each concluded, along with the Federal Judge who was forced to "dismiss" our case ( it was the first to be "stayed", pending outcomes in USCFC).
Please, if you have an insight that suggests a different avenue, please suggest it. But a channel that is similar to every other drug product liability precedent. Thanks.
"We have been represented by one of the nation's largest mass tort plaintiff's attorneys, one of the most prominent firms that practice at USCFC ..."
They are not. Parroting their marketing material as credible suggests that you've been suckered. Goniffs will gonigf, especially from those seeking hope, and looking to blame.
Sigh 😔
Quacks and wackos have taken over. ‘Twill be a long time before Reason is restored.
Thank you for another great column.
Best practice and health authority recommended in Ontario Canada, children in grades 7 & 8 can receive ...not forced...Hep B & Gardasil...why because reality & health data knows them to becoming sexually activity.
Babies/newborns are not routinely given HBV antinatal.
Gardasil is completely beneficial & for many like saving.
Aluminum in vaccines is an adjuvant & NOT a toxin.
You can challenge & disagree but (full-stop) Dr. Andres Love who's reputation & credentials are 'rock solid' recently posted an excellent explanation of the unquestionable benefits of HBV on newborns along with the rationale cf other countries.
Dr. Jen Gunter MD also solid credentials, who's posts are well referenced from reputable, peer reviewed academic journals has also posted the factual benefits of Gardasil.
I have frequently stayed in my post/comments everyone is entitled titled to an opinion & their beliefs but they are not entitled to misinform others when they don't understand or are unaware of the factual science.
JJF Phm 🇨🇦
For an excellent response to ALL of the points that Dr. Offit has made here, I suggest that people read this article Dr. M. Setty: https://madhavasetty.substack.com/p/dr-paul-offit-thinks-that-pulling
It is remarkable that Dr. Offit complains about ONE infant who died from Hepatitis B because he wasn't vaccinated against it...but that was at a time BEFORE women in labor were tested for Hep B. Nowadays, every laboring woman is tested for Hep B before birth, which therefore negates the necessity to vaccinate every newborn.
As for the 10 trials that supposedly showed that vaccines with mercury didn't cause autism...well, Dr. Offit obviously knows (and should have known) that none of these trials were set-up to test for SAFETY...instead, they were primarily tested for EFFICACY. Dr. Offit KNOWS that these are two different goals.
For more critique of other misstatements in this blog, read Dr. Setty's review.
Have a listen to the abject ignorance of this lying turd:
"every laboring woman is tested for Hep B before birth"
Correction:
1) The testing is done during pregnancy, not while they are in labour.
2) Pregnant transmen are also tested.
"therefore negates the necessity to vaccinate every newborn"
The ignorance here is staggering - and deadly!
Correction of this Dull Man's bullshit:
1) This test, like all tests, is not perfect. In other words, there are false negatives. And a pregnant person may have been infected recently and not yet test positive. There can also be errors in testing and reporting.
2) Besides vertical transmission (mother-to-baby) there is also horizontal transmission. Babies can be exposed to hepatitis B from other household members or caregivers who may unknowingly carry the virus.
3) The birth dose acts as a safety net, protecting babies during a vulnerable window before their next scheduled vaccines.
4) The birth dose prevents both vertical and horizontal transmission.
So, even with a negative test result, the vaccine is a crucial layer of protection.
"For more critique of other misstatements in this blog, read Dr. Setty's review."
Are you telling me that you blindly accepted what that disgusting human being told you with the due diligence of checking. You do understand that this makes YOU his accomplice in child murder, right?
Approximately 0.7-0.9% of American women have chronic Hepatitis B infection prior to labor. And so, sweet BillyJoe adovates for giving EVERY newborn the Hep B vaccine! Yeah, just another dose of injected aluminum. And because there are no replicated trials of newborns comparing the placebo and treated groups, no one really knows the safety of these vaccines. So, sweet BillyJoe is an advoate of medical child abuse. Bye bye.
It’s not aluminium but a compound that includes aluminium, that’s like saying eating salt is the same as eating metallic sodium and breathing chlorine. Your body is full of calcium, phosphorus, sulphur, carbon, hydrogen, iron, potassium, none of which in their elemental state would be particularly healthy.
The incredibly dense Dull Man:
"Approximately 0.7-0.9% of American women have chronic Hepatitis B infection prior to labor"
That is NOW - after the introduction of the birth dose of the Hep B vaccination!
Stopping the birth dose of the Hep B vaccine would result in the prevalence of Hep B infection in children under the age of 5 increasing from <1% now to the 5% we saw in the 1980s when the vaccine was given only to high-risk infants
Also:
- what about acute Hep B infection?
- what about the false positives?
- what about horizontal infections?\
"BillyJoe adovates for giving EVERY newborn the Hep B vaccine!"
Yes, amazing hey? I advocate for a measure that has reduced the prevalence of Hep B infection from 5% to <1%, and that has resulted in a 72% decrease in deaths from hepatic failure, cirrhosis, and cancer caused by the HBV.
"Yeah, just another dose of injected aluminum. "'
Which increases the effect and duration of the vaccinations thereby reducing the dose of antigen in the vaccine and the number of doses required to achieve lasting immunity while using a dose of aluminium that does not detectably increase blood levels and that is less than that obtained from breast milk
"no one really knows the safety of these vaccines"
The safety of all vaccines has been firmly established via Phase I, II, and III clinical trials, pharmacovigilance studies, and post marketing surveillance.
"Bye bye"
Yeah, Fv<k off, you lying piece of human homoeopathic trash.
A lifetime of killing people with misinformation and with a stupid brain-dead water treatment for everything.
Mr Dullman, you say there are no trials comparing hep B vaccinated newborns to placebo (or no intervention)?
Did you even bother to do a search, or did you pull that out your lying butt?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11734710/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16443611/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4297423/
Further, the below review of the aluminum studies absolutely DESTROYS your "evidence" of safety! https://badconcepts.substack.com/p/no-evidence-of-harm-a-garbage-in?utm_source=cross-post&publication_id=698343&post_id=168459434&utm_campaign=548354&isFreemail=true&r=qaekm&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Is this “destroyed” analogous to the “completely obliterated” Iranian nuclear capability?
….Reading it, I rather think so.
Remember, homeopath, you don't know how to read studies. You are a failure and a horrible human being.
Sorry...but that "meta-analysis" did NOT test for short- or long-term safety. The first trial supposed tested for safety but there was no information on how long they evaluated the newborns. Neurological effects require evaluation after several years.
Good try...but you're deluding yourself (and others).
You don't know what a meta analysis is, Dana. You're not a scientist, you're not qualified to say anything about the studies.
Gad...are you REALLY that daft? My MPH is a masters in public health from UC Berkeley. In fact, UC Berkeley is so proud of me that the alumni magazine, which interviews its top scientists and Nobelists, interviewed me for four pages back in 1999. https://homeopathic.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/scan0010.pdf Thanx for giving me an opportunity to brag. As for you, what did your Community College or Elementary School brag about you? #LOL
The deluded one is yourself.
The first trial clearly states safety and reactions were evaluated out to 21 days post vaccination. Didn’t you read it?
You claim the metanalysis (why did you put the term into quotes?) didn’t check for short term or long term safety.
Do you even understand what a metanalysis is? It comprises a number of comparable studies eligible for outcome analysis using predetermined quality and methodological criteria. The individual studies (if you bothered to look at them) looked at safety signals for a varying length of time.
The overall recommendation was that longer term studies would be useful, but no adverse safety signals were seen.
What is it you think these Hepatitis vaccines might do to an infant, Dana? When do you think most adverse reactions are reported? (Answer…they are short term events within the first few weeks only). Long term issues like autism co7ld require RCTS going out for several years. You have an MPH, I believe? Did Berkeley not explain that the best way to look at those type of outcomes is a case-controlled study, and not a prospective RCT? …tut tut, how remiss of them. Maybe yo7 missed lectures the week they expounded on study methodology.
…And homeopathy studies are held to the same exacting methodological standards?
😂😂🤪
Tell us Dullnan, are there long term safety studies looking for neurological damage in any of the homeopathy trials?
Name one that has looked at children and assessed neurological effects “several years” downstream?
You must be a homeopath when you imagine the tiny doses of aluminium or thimerosal in vaccines somehow wreak damage years downstream.
Facts remain: You lied (again). You claimed there were no studies looking at Hep B vaccine vs placebo in newborns. There are.
Now you are throwing up a reflective shield and moving the goalposts.
Predatory Grifter Dana Ullman's amusing circa ~2000-appearing website: https://homeopathic.com/about/
His 'Evidence Based Homeopathic Family Medicine' could be used for a middle school class on learning to spot GARBAGE "evidence": https://homeopathic.com/evidence-based-homeopathic-family-medicine-sample-191-pages-of-the-750-page-ebook/
For amusement, the first 190-pages:
https://homeopathic.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/2025-JulySAMPLE-EvidenceBasedHomeopathy.pdf
Thank goodness the pharmaceutical companies don't grift!
Too fucking funny - 1996 called. They want their website back. It's heartwarming to see grifters and wanna-be quacks shill for each other.
https://terrainnavigators.com/About
https://terrainnavigators.com/resources
Name: TERRAINNAVIGATORS.COM
GoDaddy.com LLC registered
Created: 2025-06-28 17:55:06 UTC
Registry Expiration: 2026-05-14 19:59:03 UTC
Registry Domain ID: 2780978321_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
"Thank goodness the pharmaceutical companies don't grift!"
YOU are the shill, you stupid thing.
Pharmaceutical companies make more selling drugs that treat infectious diseases that they do sellig vaccines that prevent them.
Your deadly antivax lies improve their bottom line.
The irony!
This is called "whataboutism". It's a form of logical fallacy where you pretend that someone made the argument that you think counters what was said.
Get a better education.
Wow. So you really think the pharmaceutical companies don't have blood on their hands? Facts are facts, schmuck.
Strawman/Whataboutism again, f-wit.
No one said that, anywhere.
You're just using logical fallacies. Get an education.
I guess you think using words with many syllables makes you impressive. Yet you can't even refute what you know to be true. And put on your big boy pants...you can write the word "fuck". As in Jay Kanta is a fuck-wad. See? Not that hard.
Thanx for promoting me and my website. Since you've said some disparaging comments about me, below is my simple response:
Actually, for people who want access to the 500+ clinical trials testing homeopathic medicine that were published in peer-review medical journals, you'll benefit from my ebook "Evidence Based Homeopathic Family Medicine." These studies were published in The Lancet, BMJ, Pediatrics, European Journal of Pediatrics, Pediatrics Infectious Disease Journal, PlOsOne, Cancer, The Oncologist, Chest, Rheumatology, and others.
https://homeopathic.com/product/1-ebook-evidence-based-homeopathic-family-medicine-4/
You know what's funny? Wakefield's fraudulent study was also published in the Lancet.
Do you recognize Wakefield's study as fraudulent, little guy?
"that were published in peer-review medical journals"
You mean that were published by other quacks and grifters with no real knowledge of science or scientific methods, sure. "Peers" is doing some heavy lifting, there. Your peers aren't scientists, just like you aren't a scientist. You don't know how to design a proper RCT, you use testimonials in your "studies" and you don't know how repeatability and validation are the essence of scientific research.
Though I doubt you'll benefit from reading:
https://www.nature.com/news/2004/041004/full/news041004-19.html
I'm sure your readers will.
D. Ullman: "Dr. M. Setty"
Another Madhava "Mad Dog" Setty ball muncher and arse licker.
Embarrassing as hell!
Here's the silly homoeopath, Dull Man, back again. You've got to laugh when antivaxxers claim among their ranks, a dull man who thinks water is a cure for everything. Fitting, of course, because all antivaxxers are science illiterate and cognitively impaired like our sad dull man.
Poor ole BillyJoe...he only knows how to attack via ad hominems. That is what happens when a person doesn't have any substantive to say. He has a problem that I reference homeopathic research that has been published in many of the highest caliber medical journals. Yeah, you can understand why he is only able to attack me with personal attacks.
The incredibly dense Dull Man only knows how to lie:
"[BillyJoe] only knows how to attack via ad hominems"
I smacked you down with knowledge and facts, arsehole.
THEN I kicked you in the arse in a well-deserved personal attack.
There is no excuse, morally or ethically, to fooling people into giving you money in exchange for your useless homoeopathic water "treatments". It is a brain-dead concept by brain-dead idiots like you preying on the unsuspecting public who desperately need to be protected from lying grifting arseholes like you.
You don't know what an ad hominem is, little uneducated fraud.
Homeopathy is for grifters, not scientists. You are NOT a scientist.
"highest caliber medical journals" <- This is a lie.
Hey Dullman, did you ever stop to think that you regard Dr Setty’s response to Offit as “excellent” because you are a bit on the dim side, and can’t distinguish fact from fiction and supposition?
Here you are saying: “It is remarkable that Dr. Offit complains about ONE infant who died from Hepatitis B because he wasn't vaccinated against it...but that was at a time BEFORE women in labor were tested for Hep B.”
Yet Setty himself says the mother was positive for Hep B….SO WAS HE LYING, …OR ARE YOU??
Setty tries to imply that there is a one in a thousand chance that the vaccine would prevent a case of Hep B. But this mother was Hep B positive, and there is a 100% certainty the child would catch Hep B during birth/delivery/breast feeding. In that situation, giving Hep B vaccine to the child immediately after delivery prevents Hep B in 95% of cases where the mother is positive for HBsAg but eAg negative, and 50% effective where the mother is sag and eAg positive (the most infectious subset).
So in the case mentioned by Offit depriving the infant of vaccine very probably led to the child becoming infected.
Damn you're pathetic.
As Mr Dullman isn’t answering, but you wish to make contributions, perhaps you could give us the benefit of your independent opinion,:
Who was lying about the mother having tested positive for Hep B…Was it Dullman, or Setty?
I'll have to read up on Dr. Setty. I don't recognize him. I'm saying that Dullman is incredibly pathetic. He really has a huge ego and no real skill in science. His inability to recognize his own limitations is why he's so confident and unfortunately, successful at grifting.
Sorry, I thought you were replying to me.
Profuse apologies.…