
The Truth about Vaccines - shubhamjain
https://unherd.com/2020/07/dont-dismiss-the-anti-vaxxers/
======
sildur
> as we already have during this pandemic in the case of facemasks, first
> advising that they were useless and maybe even dangerous (which may or may
> not have been a “noble lie” to preserve mask stocks for healthcare workers)

That “noble lie” has utterly crushed confidence in authorities everywhere. I
hope that the long lasting fallout caused by the lie was worth it.

------
wavepruner
Posting this now before finishing the article to be an early poster. (see edit
below for my comments after finishing the article)

The article refers to missteps and errors doctors have made concerning
vaccinations. One misstep/error that is concerning to me is the use of
thimerosal as a preservative/adjuvant.

Around 1999, the FDA began to pressure manufacturers to remove thimerosal from
all childhood vaccines due to safety concerns. The following link is a great
summary why that presents pro/con perspectives. Thimerosal is no longer used
in childhood vaccines, and has been largely replaced by aluminum-based
adjuvants. [https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-
biologics/vaccines/thimer...](https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-
biologics/vaccines/thimerosal-vaccines-questions-and-answers)

In 2004, FDA official William Egan stated that no clinical trial had been done
to evaluate the safety of thimerosal, a preservative/adjuvant that was
commonly used in vaccinations. Except for a poorly run 1930 study. See the
following link for the testimony. It's from an anti-vax youtube channel, but
the testimony is real and uncut.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBRwOohhHuA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBRwOohhHuA)

A few years ago, after about 15 years of studying biochemistry and personal
experimentation (including obtaining an environmental engineering degree), I
identified the root cause of my crippling illness that took away my ability to
walk. Chronic mercury toxicity. Thimerosal contains mercury. Maybe I got the
mercury somewhere else, but I have no other known exposures. Never ate much
fish, and my symptoms started long before I ever ate any.

I have reversed the course of my illness using a medication that specifically
binds to mercury and facilitates easier excretion from the body. I've been
using this therapy for 3 years now with consistent improvement. If it was a
placebo effect it would not produce consistent results for such a long period
of time.

For those curious, the medication I'm using is emeramide. It is currently
going through the FDA approval process for the treatment of mercury toxicity,
and looks like it will be approved within 10 years.

Edit:

After finishing the article I'd like to address two points:

(1) I see that the author discussed the FDA's removal of thimerosal. They
point out how experts "talked out of both sides of their mouths", claiming
thimerosal was safe, but insisted it be removed as expeditiously as possible.
Toxicity is very very complex science. During my 4 years as an environmental
engineer I noticed a huge amount of politicking around toxicity issues because
it's so hard to prove if some compound is safe or not. My interpretation of
the expert's behavior regarding thimerosal is that they became so
uncomfortable with the unproven safety profile of the compound that they
pushed for it's removal, while simultaneously saying it was fine in order to
cover their asses. It's career suicide to admit you supported the use of a
compound all the while insisting it was safe, only to flip-flop and say it was
dangerous all along. So the experts do the right thing, banning the compound,
while covering their asses. I saw this phenomenon over and over while working
in pollution remediation.

(2) The author spends considerable time discrediting Wakefield's MMR study.
MMR never contained thimerosal, so discussion of that study with respect to
thimerosal's safety is not applicable. Also, Wakefield's study was ONE study,
and it's so strange how the pro-vax movement keeps talking about how terrible
it was like it is still relevant. There have been hundreds if not thousands of
other studies much more worthy of discussion. The healthcare industry has
published numerous fraudulent studies from all sorts of perspectives. It's not
a phenomenon only associated with people who question vaccine safety. See
Merck's fraudulent study demonstrating Vioxx's safety. They just removed 3
participants so the numbers looked good.

~~~
secstate
I think Vioxx is a great case study in why people are growing skeptical of not
just vaccines, but pharma solutions to daily problems in general.

I find it hard to be too critical with people who are skeptical of modern
medical science, given we know the Replication Crisis [0] has yet to be
resolved. Between the human brain's chronic inability to parse statistics
properly and the incredible amount of money to be made in solutions that make
chronic conditions or deadly diseases go away, I do my best to be tolerant.

Ironically, another post that's currently sitting on the HNews frontpage has
some fun ads from the 60s encouraging women to slam sugar before lunch so they
don't eat as much. I'm sure this advice was being peddled alongside physicians
who not only smoked in their patient rooms, but encouraged smoking for it's
weight loss side-effect.

Separating the human from science is unfathomably difficult. Humans are cruel,
selfish and misguided about many things. Assuming because something was
published in JAMA or NEJM by someone who spent 6 years in a PhD program at an
accredited university, that it's the gospel truth should be discouraged.
People should ask questions and think for themselves. And as a result, some
people will make horrible decisions and some may even die directly from those
decisions or from the long term consequences. But then again, there were
probably plenty of doctors in the 60s who had a gut feeling about the safety
of smoking and ended up dying of some horrible and preventable cancer. But
what the hell, they had a medical degree, so they probably knew better than
everyone else.

[0]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis)

Edited to add missing link

~~~
wavepruner
One big issue that gets lost in the discussion is how many of these treatments
are reasonably safe for perfectly healthy people, and it's the people with
risk factors who need to be concerned. That's why informed consent and choice
are so important.

Maybe Vioxx was fine for most, and the decrease in digestive symptoms made it
the ideal medication for many. Maybe doctors could have withheld prescriptions
for people at risk of heart attack. Maybe a big warning could have been placed
on every bottle so patients could decide for themselves. But instead it blew
up into a drama-fest because one side has to be 100% correct and the other
crazy or fraudsters.

If this either/or dynamic was addressed we could come close to having our cake
and eating it too.

But instead everyone is shoe horned into limited studies, and those less-than-
healthy people on the fringes are demonized and ostracized as luddites
destroying human civilization. Except every once in a while when big pharma
gets the blame for pushing safety risks too far.

------
Fjolsvith
Fun fact: You cannot get emergency FDA approval for a vaccine (Remdesivir) if
another effective drug exists (HCQ).

~~~
djaque
Firstly, Remdesivir isn't a vaccine. Second, there is no magic cure. I just
took another look at controlled trials of OH-Chloroquine and the latest
science says its effects on patient outcomes are small when they exist at all.

~~~
casefields
OP was taking the NYT method such as in this article about a possible vaccine:

>The goal is to prevent haphazard or inequitable distribution of a treatment
or vaccine when there isn’t enough to go around. Such a system has already
been used in allocations of remdesivir, the first drug shown to be effective
against the coronavirus.

>“This is all very new,” said Dr. Douglas White, an ethicist and vice chairman
of the department of critical medicine at the University of Pittsburgh, which
began using a weighted lottery last month to distribute remdesivir.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/health/coronavirus-
vaccin...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/health/coronavirus-vaccine-
allocation.html)

It's quite easy to see how the jump to vaccine can be made when they really
meant treatment.

