A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Kids Health
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tuna vs. Flu Shot



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 21st 05, 03:15 PM
Mark Probert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Tuna vs. Flu Shot

Note the highlighted paragraphs.


Posted on Thu, Jan. 20, 2005

http://www.sunherald.com/mld/thesunh...g/10686293.htm



Mercury in flu shot no danger


Q: With restrictions lifted on who can get a flu shot, and the possibility
of flu outbreaks in February, I'm thinking of getting the shot. My concern
is that the only available flu vaccine contains a high amount of mercury, as
you recently wrote. Is the risk worth it?

A: Mercury is present in thimerosal, a preservative used to inhibit germ
growth in flu vaccines. Mercury is toxic at excessive levels.

Chiron, one of two companies providing flu vaccine to the United States, was
shut down due to manufacturing problems, an event that led to this season's
widely publicized vaccine shortage.

As I pointed out before, Chiron is the only manufacturer that offered an
adult dose of flu vaccine containing just a trace amount of mercury (1 mcg).

The currently available flu shot (from Aventis Pasteur) comes in a pediatric
dose containing a trace amount of mercury (0.5 mcg) and an adult dose
containing a higher (standard) amount of mercury (25 mcg).

The offshoot is that pregnant women and others (including children over age
3) who get an adult dose of the flu shot do not have a trace-mercury option
this season.

However, this isn't meant to imply that the standard-mercury adult dose
might be unsafe.

****************************

One way to gain perspective is to compare the amount of mercury in the flu
shot with the amount found naturally in tuna fish. Hang with me for a little
math.

According to the EPA, light tuna, considered to be low in mercury, contains
an average of .12 PPM (parts per million) of mercury
(www.cfsan.fda.gov/~frf/sea-mehg.html).

That works out to 0.12 mcg of mercury per gram of tuna. A typical 6-oz (170
grams) can of light tuna would thus contain 20.4 mcg of mercury, on average.

That's very close to the 25 mcg of mercury contained in the adult dose of
the flu shot.

The essential concern with mercury is its accumulation in the body over
time.

******************************************

EPA/FDA guidelines say it's OK for those at highest risk to consume up to 12
ounces weekly of light tuna. This includes women who may become pregnant,
pregnant women, nursing mothers, and young children.

Eating only one 6-oz can of light tuna a week (with an average mercury
content of 20.4 mcg) would expose you to over 1,000 mcg of mercury a year.

That's 40 times more mercury per year than you'd get from an annual flu
shot.


********************************

Also, the form of mercury in flu vaccine (ethyl mercury) is deemed less
likely to cause harm than that present in seafood (methyl mercury).

*********************************


For exceptional cases, a workaround might be to administer two shots of the
pediatric dose. That's equivalent to one adult dose, but with only a trace
amount of mercury (1 mcg).

The bottom line: For most people, the risks and miseries of getting the flu
far outweigh any risks that might be associated with mercury in the flu
vaccine.



  #2  
Old January 22nd 05, 04:28 AM
Kevysmom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I have always been annoyed by the "a vaccine has as much mercury

as a
can of tuna" comment, and finally decided to do some research. I

put
the following together, which you can feel free to use with

whomever
you want.

Cheers,

JB


Myth:The mercury received in a vaccine is no greater than in a

can of
tuna. Eating a can of tuna has certainly never caused autism.

This myth has received a lot of publicity because it offers
an analogy anyone can understand and makes the mercury-autism
connection appear trivial.

The analogy can be improved by comparing a 200-pound male
adult consuming tuna with the infant who receives a single

vaccine on
their first day of birth (since day-old infants don't eat tuna).

On
the first day of birth an infant receives the Hep B vaccine with
about 25 micrograms of ethlymercury – this does approximate the 30
micrograms of methlymercury in an average can of tuna. Since the
average infant weighs about 7 pounds, the weight equivalent

number of
cans of tuna for an adult would be 28 cans.

If you take those 28 cans of tuna and distill it down to
mercury content, you would have 840 micrograms of mercury. Keep in
mind that the stomach successfully absorbs and excretes about 90%

of
any mercury ingested through food, leaving only about 10% of the
mercury for the bloodstream. Since the mercury in vaccines is
injected directly into the bloodstream where 100% of it can be
absorbed by the organs, you'd need an additional 252 cans of tuna

to
get the equivalent amount of mercury into the bloodstream for a

total
of 280 cans of tuna and 8,400 micrograms of methlymercury.

So, receiving the Hep B vaccine on the first day of birth is
the equivalent of a 200-pound adult male consuming 280 cans of

tuna
in a single day. One final adjustment: the adult male in the

analogy
needs to have no capacity to excrete mercury. As Boyd Haley, Ph.D.
notes, "it is very well known that infants do not produce

significant
levels of bile or have adult renal capacity for several months

after
birth. Bilary transport is the major biochemical route by which
mercury is removed from the body, and infants cannot do this very
well."

So, a 200-pound male who consumes 280 cans of tuna in a
single day and has their ability to excrete mercury severely
diminished is the same as a day-old infant receiving the Hep B
vaccine. That's a fair analogy.



Just because the FDA tells us that Mercury in the Flu vaccine is safe for
pregnant women, Doesnt mean you have to believe it, How many died from
Vioxx while the FDA looked the other way!!

  #3  
Old January 22nd 05, 04:29 AM
Kevysmom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I have always been annoyed by the "a vaccine has as much mercury

as a
can of tuna" comment, and finally decided to do some research. I

put
the following together, which you can feel free to use with

whomever
you want.

Cheers,

JB


Myth:The mercury received in a vaccine is no greater than in a

can of
tuna. Eating a can of tuna has certainly never caused autism.

This myth has received a lot of publicity because it offers
an analogy anyone can understand and makes the mercury-autism
connection appear trivial.

The analogy can be improved by comparing a 200-pound male
adult consuming tuna with the infant who receives a single

vaccine on
their first day of birth (since day-old infants don't eat tuna).

On
the first day of birth an infant receives the Hep B vaccine with
about 25 micrograms of ethlymercury – this does approximate the 30
micrograms of methlymercury in an average can of tuna. Since the
average infant weighs about 7 pounds, the weight equivalent

number of
cans of tuna for an adult would be 28 cans.

If you take those 28 cans of tuna and distill it down to
mercury content, you would have 840 micrograms of mercury. Keep in
mind that the stomach successfully absorbs and excretes about 90%

of
any mercury ingested through food, leaving only about 10% of the
mercury for the bloodstream. Since the mercury in vaccines is
injected directly into the bloodstream where 100% of it can be
absorbed by the organs, you'd need an additional 252 cans of tuna

to
get the equivalent amount of mercury into the bloodstream for a

total
of 280 cans of tuna and 8,400 micrograms of methlymercury.

So, receiving the Hep B vaccine on the first day of birth is
the equivalent of a 200-pound adult male consuming 280 cans of

tuna
in a single day. One final adjustment: the adult male in the

analogy
needs to have no capacity to excrete mercury. As Boyd Haley, Ph.D.
notes, "it is very well known that infants do not produce

significant
levels of bile or have adult renal capacity for several months

after
birth. Bilary transport is the major biochemical route by which
mercury is removed from the body, and infants cannot do this very
well."

So, a 200-pound male who consumes 280 cans of tuna in a
single day and has their ability to excrete mercury severely
diminished is the same as a day-old infant receiving the Hep B
vaccine. That's a fair analogy.



Just because the FDA tells us that Mercury in the Flu vaccine is safe for
pregnant women, Doesnt mean you have to believe it, How many died from
Vioxx while the FDA looked the other way!!

  #4  
Old January 22nd 05, 08:28 AM
PF Riley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 22:28:44 -0500, "Kevysmom"
wrote:


I have always been annoyed by the "a vaccine has as much mercury

as a
can of tuna" comment, and finally decided to do some research. I

put
the following together, which you can feel free to use with

whomever
you want.

Cheers,

JB


I only see this text as quoted by "Kevysmom" but I'll reply
nonetheless.

Myth:The mercury received in a vaccine is no greater than in a

can of
tuna. Eating a can of tuna has certainly never caused autism.

This myth has received a lot of publicity because it offers
an analogy anyone can understand and makes the mercury-autism
connection appear trivial.


And it is true.

The analogy can be improved by comparing a 200-pound male
adult consuming tuna with the infant who receives a single

vaccine on
their first day of birth (since day-old infants don't eat tuna).


Your analogy is flawed, as you, like most know-nothing anti-vacs,
blind to your own ignorance, know little about physiology. Read on.

On
the first day of birth an infant receives the Hep B vaccine with
about 25 micrograms of ethlymercury – this does approximate the 30
micrograms of methlymercury in an average can of tuna. Since the
average infant weighs about 7 pounds, the weight equivalent

number of
cans of tuna for an adult would be 28 cans.


Wrong. Weight is an imperfect substitute for true physiologic scaling,
which is more closely related to body surface area than weight. Use of
weight as a surrogate is only valid for small infants, and tends to
lead to over-estimates of effect in larger individuals. Why do you
think we dose medications upwards by weight but stop once we reach the
"adult dose"? If we dose amoxicillin at 80 mg/kg/d for an infant, do
we give 6,700 mg/d to a 185-lb. adult?

If you take those 28 cans of tuna and distill it down to
mercury content, you would have 840 micrograms of mercury. Keep in
mind that the stomach successfully absorbs and excretes about 90%

of
any mercury ingested through food, leaving only about 10% of the
mercury for the bloodstream.


Huh? The stomach "absorbs and excretes" mercury? What in the world are
you talking about? Do you know ANYTHING about physiology?

Since the mercury in vaccines is
injected directly into the bloodstream where 100% of it can be
absorbed by the organs, you'd need an additional 252 cans of tuna

to
get the equivalent amount of mercury into the bloodstream for a

total
of 280 cans of tuna and 8,400 micrograms of methlymercury.


Another of the usual lies told by anti-vac dumb****s. Vaccines are
never "injected directly into the bloodstream."

So, receiving the Hep B vaccine on the first day of birth is
the equivalent of a 200-pound adult male consuming 280 cans of

tuna
in a single day. One final adjustment: the adult male in the

analogy
needs to have no capacity to excrete mercury.


How about this "final adjustment": Hepatitis B vaccine no longer
contains mercury.

As Boyd Haley, Ph.D.
notes, "it is very well known that infants do not produce

significant
levels of bile or have adult renal capacity for several months

after
birth. Bilary transport is the major biochemical route by which
mercury is removed from the body, and infants cannot do this very
well."

So, a 200-pound male who consumes 280 cans of tuna in a
single day and has their ability to excrete mercury severely
diminished is the same as a day-old infant receiving the Hep B
vaccine. That's a fair analogy.


Hardly.

PF
  #5  
Old January 22nd 05, 02:31 PM
Jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

When you compare "mercury" in fish to "mercury" in vaccines, you are
comparing apples and oranges. The chemicals can be very different. It is
like comparing nitrogen in cyanide and nitrogen in protein. The compound
that contains mercury in vaccines is rapidly excreted by the body, and, in
the quantities used, has never been shown to be dangerous. Other mercury
compounds, like methylmercury, which is found in fish, are much more toxic.

Jeff


  #6  
Old January 22nd 05, 03:28 PM
00doc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

PF Riley wrote:
On the first day of birth an infant receives
the Hep B vaccine with about 25 micrograms
of ethlymercury - this does approximate the 30
micrograms of methlymercury in an average can
of tuna. Since the average infant weighs about 7
pounds, the weight equivalent number of
cans of tuna for an adult would be 28 cans.


Wrong. Weight is an imperfect substitute for true
physiologic scaling,
which is more closely related to body surface area than
weight. Use of
weight as a surrogate is only valid for small infants, and
tends to
lead to over-estimates of effect in larger individuals.
Why do you
think we dose medications upwards by weight but stop once
we reach the
"adult dose"? If we dose amoxicillin at 80 mg/kg/d for an
infant, do
we give 6,700 mg/d to a 185-lb. adult?


Right. That is why when you look at the pediatric doses
(mg/kg) they usually hit the adult dose at about 40 kg (88
lbs). Am infant requires 100cc per kg of fluid daily do a
3.5 kg (normal sized) infant requires about 350 cc per day.
Scaling up to a 200lb man, as these morons like to do, would
have the guy drinking 10 liters of water a day.


If you take those 28 cans of tuna and distill it down
to
mercury content, you would have 840 micrograms of
mercury. Keep in mind that the stomach successfully
absorbs and excretes about 90% of any mercury ingested
through food, leaving only about 10% of the
mercury for the bloodstream.


Huh? The stomach "absorbs and excretes" mercury? What in
the world are
you talking about? Do you know ANYTHING about physiology?


I got a chuckle out of that myself. The stomach as an
excretory organ. I wonder where he thinks it goes? It does
provide a convenient excuse to multiply the numbers by 10.


So, receiving the Hep B vaccine on the first day of
birth is
the equivalent of a 200-pound adult male consuming 280
cans of tuna
in a single day. One final adjustment: the adult male
in the
analogy needs to have no capacity to excrete mercury.


How about this "final adjustment": Hepatitis B vaccine no
longer
contains mercury.


Well, you need to cut them some slack and let them use the
tired old outdated arguments untilt hey can come up with new
ones that fit the current facts.

--
00doc


  #7  
Old January 22nd 05, 05:11 PM
Kevysmom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Effect of thimerosal, a preservative in vaccines, on intracellular Ca2+
concentration of rat cerebellar neurons.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

Methyl-mercury, usually from contaminated food, is very dangerous to
pregnant women. Methyl-mercury causes profound mental retardation,
cerebral
palsy, seizures, spasticity, tremors, and incoordination, along with
eye and
hearing damage in the unborn baby as a result of the mother's
exposure.
Organic mercury passes into the breast milk as well.



The effect of thimerosal, an organomercurial preservative in
vaccines, on cerebellar neurons dissociated from 2-week-old rats was
compared with those of methylmercury using a flow cytometer with
appropriate fluorescent dyes. Thimerosal and methylmercury at
concentrations ranging from 0.3 to 10 microM increased the
intracellular concentration of Ca2+ ([Ca2+]i) in a concentration-
dependent manner. The potency of 10 microM thimerosal to increase
the [Ca2+]i was less than that of 10 microM methylmercury. Their
effects on the [Ca2+]i were greatly attenuated, but not completely
suppressed, under external Ca(2+)-free condition, suggesting a
possibility that both agents increase membrane Ca2+ permeability and
release Ca2+ from intracellular calcium stores. The effect of 10
microM thimerosal was not affected by simultaneous application of 30
microM L-cysteine whereas that of 10 microM methylmercury was
significantly suppressed. The potency of thimerosal was similar to
that of methylmercury in the presence of L-cysteine. Both agents at
1 microM or more similarly decreased the cellular content of
glutathione in a concentration-dependent manner, suggesting an
increase in oxidative stress. Results indicate that thimerosal
exerts some cytotoxic actions on cerebellar granule neurons
dissociated from 2-week-old rats and its potency is almost similar
to that of methylmercury.


  #8  
Old January 22nd 05, 05:13 PM
Kevysmom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/Geier011805thimerosal.pdf

X-Comment: AT&T Maillennium special handling code - c
From: "Dr. Mark R. Geier"Dear Everyone,

Please, find attached to this email a new study, "Neurodevelopmental
Disorders Following Thimerosal-Containing Childhood Immunizations: A
Follow-up Analysis" [saved as NeuroDevelopmental Disorders Following TCVs
-
A Follow-up Analysis.pdf in Adobe Acrobat Format] just published in the
peer-reviewed scientific/medical International Journal of Toxicology
(American College of Toxicology). The authors previously published the
first
epidemiological study from the United States associating thimerosal from
childhood vaccines with neurodevelopmental disorders based upon
assessment
of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database.

  #9  
Old January 22nd 05, 05:30 PM
Kevysmom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You are misleading in your comment about the amount of mercury that
was "injected" into pregnant women. Just for one injection of 35 mcg
of mercury into a 132lb pregnant woman would be 5.8x over the EPA
limit. The limit is 6mcg for a 132 lb woman and this is
for "ingesting" mercury....The Rhogam contained 35 mcg of mercury.
Add Aluminum that is also injected at the same time, This increases
the effect of mercury and you land up with some very mercury
poisoned children. The injection is NOT spread out over 30 days its
all at once.

  #10  
Old January 22nd 05, 06:05 PM
Kevysmom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Volume 26, Issue 1, January 2005, Pages 1-8

*Thimerosal Neurotoxicity is Associated with Glutathione Depletion:
Protection with Glutathione Precursors * *S.J. James, William Slikker
III, Stepan Melnyk, Elizabeth New, Marta Pogribna and Stefanie
Jernigan *

^1 Department of Pediatrics, University of Arkansas for Medical
Sciences
and Arkansas Children's Hospital Research Institute, Little Rock, AR
72202, USA


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science.../sdarticle.pdf

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 [email protected] Info and FAQ's 3 June 28th 04 07:41 PM
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 [email protected] Info and FAQ's 3 April 17th 04 12:24 PM
misc.kids FAQ on Childhood Vaccinations, Part 1/4 [email protected] Info and FAQ's 3 January 16th 04 10:15 AM
Pregnant, Nursing mothers should limit intake of tuna Elana Kehoe General 10 December 19th 03 01:05 AM
Pregnant, Nursing mothers should limit intake of tuna Elana Kehoe Breastfeeding 10 December 19th 03 01:05 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.