livingdeb: (Default)
[personal profile] livingdeb
There are some people who are actually afraid of vaccines because they think they are too risky. I just assume that these people have no experience with the diseases that these vaccines are preventing because really, getting vaccines is basically a no-brainer if there's any way you can afford it.

Fortunately, when most people are vaccinated for a disease, this provides some protection to others as well, just because there are that many fewer folks around who they could catch it from.

So I was asking a co-worker if she was going off to get her flu shot and she said no because the vaccines are preserved with mercury. I said no way. Even if they used to be, surely not anymore. She told a long story that sounded convincing, but then I have caught her spreading an urban myth before, so I did some research. I really don't want to be falling for this kind of crap.

But it turns out to be true. The compound they use now is less toxic than the other one they used to use. It's a tiny amount, the amount you would get from a half a can of white tuna. It causes allergic-type reactions at the vaccination site for some people. It may or may not contribute to the build up of mercury in the system enough to increase one's risk for scary neurological disorders. It's no longer used for any vaccinations except for the influenza ones, and there are even some no-mercury-added vaccines available (though not at my workplace, I assume). The government has recommended but not required that a different preservative be used.

I don't want to support any company that won't make the switch.

Normally I'm on the fence about getting the vaccine anyway. Basically, catching the flu would be easier on me than on most people. I am young and healthy, have a lot of sick leave, and have the kind of job where they can spare me for a week if necessary. I have a warm bed, working refrigerator, etc. So normally I only get the vaccine in years when there is enough available for everyone who wants it. This year is one of those years. But I've decided to blow it off this year.

The worst thing is that this is fuel for those anti-immunization people.

on 2007-10-18 04:10 am (UTC)
Posted by (Anonymous)
There's really utterly no evidence of any harm from mercury in vaccines. Preserving them with mercury is far cheaper than any other way, allowing the vaccine to be more widely available. This is especially true in third world countries, where irrational American responses to mercury in vaccines mean more children will die of preventable diseases.

Just MNSHO, of course.

Tam

on 2007-10-19 12:02 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] livingdeb.livejournal.com
I would like to know how you know this. My minimal research, after throwing out resources that seemed a bit too much like conspiracy theorists and also resources that seemed a bit too trusting, was still inconclusive.

Of course now I can't find the sort-of negative-sounding ones. Basically the CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/thimerosal.htm) says "Thimerosal contains approximately 49% ethylmercury. There is no convincing evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines, except for minor reactions like redness and swelling at the injection site."

And the part about less (but still some!) mercury getting into the brain with the newer compound than with the older (methylmercury) compound is less relevant than I thought because the amount stored in the brain decreases in time, just like the amount stored in the blood does.

on 2007-10-18 05:03 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] llcoolvad.livejournal.com
Interesting! Since I have asthma my doctor has advised me I should always get the shot; I've already had mine this year, in fact, at my last doctor's visit a couple weeks ago. And I always get a reaction at the injection site (my worst reaction was to the pneumonia shot, but you only get that once every 5-10 years -- that reaction was the circumference of an orange and about a half inch high. Hot, painful).

But a buildup of mercury in my system! Ack! I don't eat much tuna, though, so maybe the buildup won't be so bad overall?

You know, this makes me mad. After I got my first shot and had a reaction, the next time I asked the nurse what caused it and she said "some people just get a reaction -- sometimes it's because it's an egg-based vaccine, and people react to that" -- she never said anything about mercury! Very interesting!

on 2007-10-19 12:05 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] livingdeb.livejournal.com
Wow! That's some reaction!

Pneumonia shot? Cool.

Apparently there's very little build-up (see my reply above). Also, note that "light" tuna has much, much less mercury than "white" tuna.

on 2007-10-18 07:03 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] grieve.livejournal.com
The only time I ever got the flu, was the year I got the flu vaccine. Anecdotal and small sample I know, but I refuse to get the vaccine based on that.

on 2007-10-19 12:10 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] livingdeb.livejournal.com
I also got the flu the first time I got vaccinated, so I shied away from it for a few years. But that turned out to be just a fluke--I assume I waited too long to get the shot (it doesn't start working for a week or so). If you got the flu later than that, you might have gotten one of the strains that was not included in the vaccine.

on 2007-10-20 02:44 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile] raaga123.livejournal.com
It happened to me once, too. After getting my first flu shot in years this year, I asked the nurse about that, and she said that it was more common years ago than it is now, because they used to use weakened flu viruses instead of dead ones.

Profile

livingdeb: (Default)
livingdeb

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 2nd, 2025 06:57 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios