The youngest Leave the lights on blogger, my 14-month-old son, got three shots last week. He and his brother have had every vaccination recommended by pediatricians. I understand that a lot of parents are hesitant about vaccinations because of fears of their safety. Those parents should fear for the safety of their children if they don't vaccinate.

Vaccines are safe

Most of the fears about vaccinations center on the purported link between the mercury-based preservative thimerosal and autism. But study after study — most recently, one conducted in Italy — have shown that thimerosal does not cause autism. In fact, the original study that suggested the thimerosal-autism link was faked. And even if this evidence is not convincing, thimerosal is no longer used in most vaccinations.

Not vaccinating can be deadly

Last month in Minnesota, a seven-month-old baby died of Hib, or Haemophilus influenzae type b. Hib infections are vanishingly rare in the U.S. because of the routine use of the Hib vaccine, which is given at 2, 4, 6, and 12 months (this is one of the shots my son received last month). The child who died, and two of four other kids who were sickened by the Hib outbreak, were unvaccinated "because of their parents' decisions." In other words, the parents decided not to protect their children against deadly infections.

Of the other two children, one was only five months old and so had not completed the primary 3-shot series. The other had an immune deficiency. When vaccination rates are above a certain "threshold," people like these two children are protected by "herd immunity" (a term that originated in animal husbandry). The disease cannot spread because there are not enough vulnerable individuals in the population. When people choose not to be vaccinated, or not to have their children vaccinated, herd immunity suffers, and people like these two babies can be sickened.

The refusal to vaccinate one's children is a source of frustration for health officials. I cannot understand a parent's reluctance to protect their children against deadly diseases that should only be a memory in the twenty-first century.

I had the misfortune finding an article by one Cynthia A. Janak on Gardasil, the vaccine against human papillomavirus. Though I would like to merely dismiss this article (oh, I so, so wish I could merely dismiss it), I am just too horrified by the heinous abuse of science. I cannot resist picking up poor Science, brushing her off, and patching her wounds a little.

I won't even address Janak's heavy use of anecdotal evidence. Instead, I'll focus on her attempt, starting about a third of the way down the page, to condemn Gardasil based on its "toxic" ingredients. She goes through the list one by one, quoting the horrible toxic effects of each ingredient:

• Gardasil contains 225 mcg of aluminum. Do you know how little that is? That's about 1/4000 gram, or less than 1/100,000 ounce. You get more aluminum eating out of aluminum cooking pots.
• Histadine is a substance found widely throughout the body. It can safely be taken daily in supplement form in amounts 2000 times greater than what is found in Gardasil.
• Polysorbate 80 is a type of compound commonly called a "wetting agent" and is found in ice cream and milk.
• Sodium borate is used to keep the pH balanced. Wikipedia flat out states that it "is not acutely toxic." You have to deal with very large quantities before you need to worry about safety precautions.
• Sodium chloride is table salt.

Did you notice that Gardasil also contains dihydrogen monoxide? You might like to read more about it here. I should warn you, though, that dihydrogen monoxide is just another name for water.

Janak's blog, Truthspace, is a manifestation of a mind deeply troubled by paranoia. The truth is that the first rule of toxicology is that the dose makes the poison. Cyanide, arsenic, and lead are all harmless in tiny enough quantities, while necessary substances like vitamin A, iron, and even water can be toxic in high doses.

Time may show that Gardasil is not a completely safe vaccine. I see no reason to make that assumption at this time. Gardasil may be a controversial vaccine, but not because it contains substances like table salt.

Poor Science. I hope she feels a little better now.

When I was at university, I worked under the assumption that scientists (some of whom I knew personally, as my professors) were in the business of uncovering the truth of the natural world. Not so, according to the Internet! As a matter of fact, scientists are in the business of hiding the truth, say a staggering number of conspiracy theories.

I just want to know why I wasn't let in on any of these conspiracies. After all, as a student of science, I should have been told what discoveries I had to suppress! Maybe they were saving that for graduate school.

Top 5 conspiracies of science (as found on the Internet):

5. AIDS is not caused by a virus

People die of so-called AIDS because of the toxic effects of AIDS medications. HIV, the virus allegedly responsible for AIDS, is harmless. How do we know? Because there are no "scientific documents" that show HIV causes AIDS. And because a "growing" collection of "bio-medical scientists" says so!

Why the conspiracy? It must have something to do with money, since the website that exposes the conspiracy spells it "AID$".

4. The earth is growing

The earth is growing. Subduction — the meeting of two tectonic plates in which one slides under the other — is impossible according to Science. Yet we have evidence that the opposite of subduction — spreading — does occur. Since the plates undergo spreading but not subduction, the earth is getting bigger and bigger. Q.E.D.

Why the conspiracy? Because this discovery would upset an entire hundred years of science! Just like those other secret discoveries, the photoelectric effect and natural selection! Oh, wait... those weren't kept secret. Wonder why this one was?

3. There are 12 planets in the solar system

Astrologers have known for years that there are really 12 planets revolving around the sun. In 2006, the existence of three new planets was declared by one "Professor H. Cohen," according to T. Stokes, paranormalist. No word what it means to astrology now that Pluto has been redefined as a non-planet. Actually, there is no word about the three new planets, or even about where Prof. Cohen professes, from anyone but T. Stokes.

Why the conspiracy? This one is based on the ignorance of scientists, who could not be bothered to learn about astrology. Out of sad ignorance, they declared it bunk, so they missed out on the astrologers' knowledge.

2. Vaccines contain toxins that are injected right into your bloodstream

The DTaP vaccine, which confers immunity against diptheria, tetanus, and pertussis, contains toxins. Toxins! In fact, it contains toxins from dangerous diseases, including pertussis, tetanus and diptheria!

Why the conspiracy? Toxins! Toxins!

1. The Lucifer Project: Starchild!

Are you prepared.... ....for lots of bad.... PUNCTUATION???? And a video that acknoleges it's speling errors without apollogy? And as one of history's stupid sheeple, are you nevertheless concerned about the next thing on the agenda of the Illuminati after 9/11? 'Cause they are planning to illuminate Saturn by turning it into a second sun!

Why the conspiracy? The Illuminati are going to use the new star to evolve themselves above us "sheeple." How? Well, somehow, of course!

Comments in the Right to Health Care series have repeatedly gravitated toward the question of what constitutes "basic" health care. I have not addressed that topic yet because it has not been established that there is any right to "basic" health care at all. But a lot of people think it is important to talk about it, so here are my thoughts.

I would consider a minimum standard of health care, in our affluent and technologically advanced society, to include the following:

• All vaccinations recommended by the various professional organizations, such as the American Medical Association.
• All screening tests recommended by professional organizations, such as cancer screenings as recommended by the American Cancer Society.
• An annual physical, or perhaps biannual for young, healthy adults.
  
• Full prenatal care as well as labor and delivery services.
• Well-baby and well-child exams.
• Treatment of chronic diseases such as diabetes and cancer.
• Surgery to save life, limb, or quality of life.
  

I also consider doctor visits for illness or injury as well as emergency services to be "basic" health care, but would support some way to keep these services from being abused, such as a reasonable copay. Likewise with mental health services.

"Basic" health care, in my opinion, does not include:

• Purely cosmetic procedures, such as removal of moles that are not pre-cancerous.
• Experimental treatments.
  

I would love to know what readers think. What is should be included with "basic" health care and what should be excluded?




del.icio.us

The god Mercury was said to be a messenger. Quicksilver, a fluid metal, shares its name with him. So what message do the media send about quicksilver?

Mercury (the element, not the god) is toxic. In humans, it affects the central nervous system. Certain forms of it are antiseptic and have been used in vaccines to prevent bacterial contamination. Ethyl mercury, also called thimerosal (in the U.S.) and thiomersal (in Europe), is the best known mercury-based vaccine preservative.

The pediatric vaccination schedule calls for a series of shots around 15-18 months. This is a time when children are starting to learn language rapidly, and are also developing socially, becoming more interactive with others. Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are often first noticed at this age, as well.

Many parents of children with ASD believe the vaccinations and the disorders are correlated. They have zeroed in on thimerosal as the culprit, since mercury affects the central nervous system. This controversial view has resulted in the removal of thimerosal from all vaccinations in the U.S. (with the exception of flu vaccines). It has also, in some cases, resulted in parents refusing to vaccinate their children against childhood diseases.

Studies have shown no link between thimerosal and autism. Most recently, ethyl mercury was shown to be excreted by infants' bodies in far less time than was previously thought. The researchers in this study concluded that the amount found in vaccines simply is not around long enough to do any nervous system damage.

Other research has shown that the rate of head growth in infants who later develop ASD differs from that of neurotypical* children. The growth was measured at ages before ASD becomes apparent, which suggests ASD may be present but (more or less) asymptomatic from infancy.

If this is the case, the 18-month series of vaccines can't be the culprit in ASD. In fact, the first appearance of ASD symptoms occurring around this series of shots must be coincidental. The medical establishment and the media should therefore reassure parents that vaccines are not only safe, but important to avoid childhood diseases, which can kill or permanently injure children.

ABC television apparently feels otherwise about its obligation. Today it debuts a new legal drama, Eli Stone, whose pilot episode involves a jury that finds that mercury caused autism in a child. According to one article, the creators say "not anti-vaccine and would be upset if parents chose not to immunize their children after seeing the show."

What other effect do they possibly believe their show could have? I wonder if ABC's parent, the Walt Disney Company, which is one of the greatest influences on modern culture (as much as I hate to say it), has forgotten the impact it has on society. Airing this program is not just irresponsible; it can do real damage to children's health. It's grossly negligent.

*Normal.