"The Danger Of Science Denial"
TED Talk by Michael Specter
"The Death Of Epistemology: Anti-Vaccine Epert (And Playboy Model) Jenny McCarthy"
"The Danger Of Science Denial"
TED Talk by Michael Specter
CDC: Depending On Virulence, Annual U.S. Deaths From Flu Range From 3000-49,000
http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/10/cdc-depending-on-virulence-annual-us.html
Ebola Presents A Trivial Threat To Americans' Health
http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/10/cdc-depending-on-virulence-annual-us.html
Hey vaccine deniers–it’s just simple math
by SkepticalRaptor
44 Comments / 44 New
When dealing with those pushing pseudoscience, like the antivaccination cult, the most frustrating thing is that they tend to ignore and deny the most basic tenets of science. If denying the fact of gravity would further their goals of "proving" vaccines are neither effective nor safe, they would do so. For all I know, they have.
Sam Harris, who has a Ph.D. in neuroscience from UCLA (which is ironic), and is one of leading science philosophers of our generation, says this about those who cling to pseudoscience:
Water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. What if someone says, “Well, that’s not how I choose to think about water.”? All we can do is appeal to scientific values. And if he doesn’t share those values, the conversation is over. If someone doesn’t value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove they should value it? If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?If the antivaccination movement didn't lead to epidemics of long-gone diseases, which can harm and kill children, the conversation would be over. I would just put the vaccine deniers in the same group as evolution deniers (creationists) or gravity deniers (there has to be some, somewhere). I would mock their pseudoscience, and move on. Of course, their denialism does lead to deaths of children, so we have to do what is right, and stop their lies, misinformation and ignorance in every forum we can.
We have to appeal to scientific values, and despite the fact that antivaccination pushers don't share those values, we must continue to try. I have gotten enough emails and comments from people that they have started to vaccinate because of what I have written, so maybe some child's life is better because all of us who support vaccines are heard.
For some, mathematics is the foundation of all science. Biology is dependent upon chemistry which is dependent upon physics which is dependent upon mathematics. Of course, I'm oversimplifying the relationships between the various branches of basic science, but my own scientific education moved in roughly the direction of advanced mathematics through basic physics to organic and physical chemistry to biology, cell biology, biochemistry and physiology.
Without mathematics, the scientific method might not make sense, because it requires statistical analysis to find small changes or differences. Though it is long lost from my brain, advanced statistics was necessary in every analysis I performed in my science life. It allowed me to find biological changes with tiny amounts of a hormone or growth factor. I didn't observe the changes directly, only through mathematical analysis did it become apparent.
All of those scary ingredients in the flu vaccine. Oh no!
Formaldehyde
Let's start with with first highlighted ingredient, formaldehyde. This simple bio-organic molecule is used in the purification of the vaccine (the last thing we want is contamination from viruses or bacteria)– 99.9% of which is removed during the final steps of manufacturing.
The package labeling does not include the amount of formaldehyde in the vaccines because it is so tiny, so minuscule, so veritably invisible, that the amount actually cannot be measured. It's possible that there is actually no formaldehyde in solution, because it cannot be measured, but the chances are good there is some because the manufacturing process can't dilute out the vaccine sufficiently to guarantee that every picogram (that's one trillionth of a gram) is removed, because it would dilute the vaccine's antigen too.
But I can tell you where formaldehyde can be measure. The normal blood level of formaldehyde is 2.74 +/- 0.14 mg/L. A normal child has a blood volume of 2-3 L, so a normal child has 5-9 mg of formaldehyde floating in her blood, about 1,000,000X more than found in a dose of vaccine. Is that math clear? It would take probably 10-20 million doses of vaccines to just slightly increase the formaldehyde level in your child.
Now you might think "how did that evil formaldehyde get into my sweet child whom I feed organic foods, and don't let them touch vaccines." Well, not only do your math skills suck (let me remind the reader, 10 million doses of vaccines to measurably move the formaldehyde level–all at once), but so does your physiology knowledge. The body produces formaldehyde as a byproduct of metabolizing alcohols (not necessarily just from a beer, but the alcohol that is produced in the body and in other foods). And lots of foods contain formaldehyde, including fruits, nuts, and other yummy things.
In addition, formaldehyde is filtered from the blood rather quickly (since it is toxic), and itshalf-life, that is the average time one-half of the molecules of formaldehyde stay in the blood, is around 1 minute. It does not accumulate, so even if you got that 10-20 million doses of vaccines, the tiny amount of formaldehyde injected would be gone in 1-2 minutes. It is simple math.
Yes, formaldehyde is a carcinogen, it can cause cancer. However, the reference dose (that is the maximum daily dose over a lifetime that would be considered safe) for formaldehyde is around 0.2 mg/kg weight/day. In other words, an average child, let's say 20 kg (about 48 lbs), could consume 4 mg of formaldehyde a day safely. Again, about 1 million times more formaldehyde than in a single dose of vaccines. And as far as I know, even amongst the most enthusiastic and ardent vaccine supporters, not one of them is demanding that we give children 1 million vaccinations. Every day. For the rest of their lives.
Once again, it is just the math.
Are we clear on this? The math doesn't support the ludicrous claims that formaldehyde in vaccines is poisoning our children.
Thiomersal
So let's move on to the other highlighted ingredients, and that's the old canard, dangerousthiomersal (or thimerosal in the USA–my education is 100% US based, but for some reason I've used the non-USA spelling for 30 years). Let's make some points clear right now. This isNOT mercury in its elemental form, which you might remember from old-style medical thermometers. So there isn't a pool of mercury in the vaccine vial. Moreover, thiomersal isONLY used, at least in vaccines, in multi-use vials, these days, only the flu vaccine.
Thiomersal is a toxic compound, there is no denying that. But let's get back to math. The toxicity of compounds is measured through an analysis called the dose-response relationship, which describes the change in effect on an organism caused by differing doses of a compound after a certain exposure time. Table salt is tasty and safe in small amounts, but could kill you if taken in huge amounts. The dose-response relationship provides a graph that mathematically establishes what amounts of a compound causes what effects. This would seem to be a logical, and easily understood concept, but for many individuals, a bad substance is always bad.
First of all, the half-life of thiomersal in blood is around 2.2 days. That might seem long, but it means half is gone in a couple of days, cleared out by the kidneys. It does not accumulate.
But the math is even more telling. This flu vaccine, given once a year, has a maximum dose of 25 micrograms of mercury (but not elemental mercury). According to the thiomersal Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), the LD50, that is, the approximate dose at which 50% of organisms will die (in this case a mouse), is 5011 mg/kg body weight.
So, a 20 kg child would get 25 micrograms of non-elemental mercury in one injection once a year. The theoretical LD50 dose for that same child would be around 100 grams of thiomersal, or about 4 million times higher than the amount of thiomersal in one vaccine dose–if vaccines used in children actually had thiomersal, which it doesn't.
So, you would have to inject your child 4 million times a day, every day, to make it potentially toxic. And no, dose-response relationships are not linear. That doesn't mean that there's some tiny risk of death from even a small dose of thiomersal–there is actually NO risk. And again, since there's no thiomersal in pediatric vaccines this argument is ridiculous.
But more than all that, we have solid scientific data that show us that thiomersal is totally unrelated to autism, and is completely safe in vaccines. This illogical removal of thiomersal from vaccines makes it nearly impossible to have multi-use vials, so every vaccine has to be in a single-use prefilled syringe, which has rapidly driven up the costs of vaccines. Wait. That's more evidence that antivaccination lunatics are in the pockets of Big Pharma. They pushed to get rid of thiomersal to make more profits for Big Pharma. That was an awesome move on their part.
So there it is. Simple math shows us that these are not dangerous toxins being injected into our kids. Sadly, simple math may not be in the list of skills of vaccine deniers.
Key citations:
- Franks SJ. A mathematical model for the absorption and metabolism of formaldehyde vapour by humans. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2005 Aug 15;206(3):309-20. Epub 2005 Jan 11. PubMed PMID: 16039942.
- Pfab R, Mückter H, Roider G, Zilker T. Clinical course of severe poisoning with thiomersal. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 1996;34(4):453-60. PubMed PMID: 8699562.
No comments:
Post a Comment