Flu season is about to begin. Not the avian flu pandemic, but the regular influenza people get every year. Seniors, children, healthcare workers, and those with medical conditions are high on the recommended list for vaccination.
A more recent addition to that group is pregnant women. But most of them do not get immunized. All the studies show that the shot is safe, yet some women are still worried. New Hampshire Public Radio’s Kerry Grens has more.
Holly Stark is six months pregnant with her first child.
Throughout her pregnancy she has made every effort to live a healthy lifestyle: toxin-free cleaners, organic produce, a strict regimen of prenatal vitamins.
Just once in a while, she sneaks in a can of coke.
And so as part of her healthy pregnancy, Stark’s physician recommended that she get the flu shot.
Stark: I started thinking about well do I do this or do I not, what kind of risks am I really looking at. I made the decision that I’m not going to have the vaccine.
Stark had heard that the flu shot contains mercury, which in some forms can be a damaging neurotoxin.
For example, pregnant women are advised to avoid certain fish because they might contain the harmful compound methyl mercury.
The flu vaccine contains a different form—ethyl mercury.
It is used as a preservative and produces no known harmful effects.
But mercury in any form still raises alarm bells for Holly Stark.
Speculation by several parent groups has proposed a link between mercury in the flu vaccine and autism in children.
Mercury has been removed from children’s vaccines.
And although a link to autism has not been proven, Stark was not willing to take any risk.
And suffering the flu didn’t sound so bad.
Stark: One thing I read on the CDC website is that of ten thousand women in their third trimester only twenty five will be hospitalized for complications of the influenza virus so that to me is such a small amount, that I put that on the side of not needing the vaccination.
Holly Stark is like the vast majority of pregnant women.
According to the Centers for Disease Control only twelve percent of pregnant women were immunized during the two thousand three two thousand four flu season.
Among the general population nearly twenty seven percent of Americans received the flu shot.
Dr. John Iskander is a medical epidemiologist at the CDC and a pediatrician.
He says a lot of pregnant women don’t get immunized because they are not aware of the risks that flu poses to them.
Iskander: Those might be pulmonary infections such as pneumonia those might also be complications related to cardiac or heart complications.
On top of these risks, Iskander says there are several studies showing that the flu vaccine did not cause birth defects.
And there was a massive study of several hundred thousand children showing no relationship between vaccines and autism.
Iskander: The basic concept here is that if these larger studies involving multiple doses of vaccines over several years if those have not shown any concern for increased rates of autism then a single dose of vaccine during pregnancy shouldn’t make a difference.
But an element of doubt still lingers.
Lowne: Right now where I stand I’m a little confused just like everybody else is.
Dr. Joel Lowne is a primary care physician in Pembroke.
He is not fully convinced that every potential negative effect of ethyl mercury has been explored.
He says he tries to balance his doubts against the goals of public health.
Vaccination is not just recommended to protect individuals, but a secondary goal is that if enough people get vaccinated it makes it very difficult for the virus to spread.
And that helps everybody.
Which is why he follows CDC guidelines and recommends the shot to his patients.
Lowne: And it is a difficult place to be at times because on one hand I want the population to be healthy but on the other hand I don’t want anything that I suggest to have an adverse reaction to someone as innocent as a baby—especially my own baby.
Which underscores how personal the decision can be.
Lowne’s wife is pregnant, and she’s decided not to get vaccinated.
He says she’s low risk because she’s a stay-at-home mom, their other two children don’t attend day care, and he will get immunized.
Linda Griffiths, a nurse midwife for over twenty years, says that’s a valid approach.
Yet there’s more to the decision making process: a woman can avoid contact with ethyl mercury by not getting vaccinated.
But then, Griffiths says, she’s at risk for needing a whole host of other chemicals.
Griffiths: I think if we look at the reasons of not wanting to take flu vaccine because we don’t want to put something into our bodies that might potentially harm the baby, then to say, ok I didn’t take that but now I’ve got to take all this other stuff: IV fluids, medications for nausea probably, medications for diarrhea.
Griffiths says the choice ultimately comes down to what risks the mother is willing to take.
Should she take a chance against the known dangers of flu?
Or should she hazard the speculative threats of the vaccine?
Dr. Iskander from the CDC predicts that as more women become aware of the health complications from getting the flu during pregnancy, they will choose to get vaccinated.
In this matter of flu vaccines and pregnant women, perhaps your correspondent and certainly her sources have missed I fear the obvious, the giant looming fact, that everyone knows that Thimerosal, the mercury based "preservative" used in fixing the vaccine in the manufacturing thereof, is a cause of autism, and as well as host of neurodegenerative effects.
We are making substantial progress here in New Mexico with presentations to the Board of Pharmacy to get rid of Thimerosal forever, and have asked the Governor, the Health Secretary, and the Attorney General to issue an advisory to prevent by Order any pregnant woman or child under 50 lbs from receiving Thimerosal in any vaccine, including for influenza.
Dr. Ken Stoller, Santa Fe Pediatrician behind this effort, my copetitioner to the Board of Pharmacy on this matter and also to prevent the consumption of another neurodegenerative additive to medications, ASPARTAME/FORMALDEHYDE, has calculated that the amount of mercury in a vaccine if spilled on the floor of a public place would require a Hazardous Materials team to clean it up, and therefore, asks the question, why are we injecting this much into any one?
It is not essential as a "preservative," nor still effective as an antibiotic, its original use back in the 1930's; so why is it still being used? That will be the subject of a hearing in the Pharmacy Board in the next few months, if all goes well, but the largest Aspartame manufacturer in the world, also the world's largest MSG manufacturer, Ajinomoto, is attempting to scuttle this hearing in the Board of Pharmacy, based on the FDA approval for Aspartame preempting any consideration at any state level.
The Attorney General of New Mexico, Patricia Madrid, is expected to issue an opinion on this matter, which will determine whether the Board of Pharmacy has the statutory power to challenge FDA approved products.
They certainly have the courage to do so, and the obligation to do so, in order to protect the health of all New Mexicans.
For more information, contact Dr. Ken Stoller, 505 780-0006 (cell) or me
Stephen Fox, Founder, New Mexico Nutrition Council 505 983-2002
I am very happy to answer questions by email as well: stephen@santafefineart.com
Dr. stoller is hbotnm@netzero.net
Thank you,
Stephen Fox
As much as I appreciated Kerry Grens segment on pregnant women and Influenza vaccines, and the important public health benefit that could result from this, she missed a major point: One of the reasons to protect pregnant women during the flu season is to also protect the baby after it is born. Flu does the most harm to the very young and the very old, and babies cannot receive immunizations against this until they are 6 mos old. Protecting intimate household contacts of young infants reduced their chance to have this disease.
Dr. Laura Fry
Family Physician
Manchester Community Health Center
I opted to not have my children vaccinated for the following facts and reasons:
Daily I am appalled to still hear about flu shots that are still using Mercury (and/or any mercury based preservatives such as Thimerosal). You failed to mention the importance of parents ordering flu shots free of preservatives and this would be beneficial to the public if you could follow up and come across more on the public welfare and safety, of what to look out for versus a shortage. Media often comes across on a heightened level of worry for parents, elderly and people to get shots, although there seems to be a shortage. It almost seemed like a ploy to get those companies more advertising. Shame on our government and shame on the pharmaceutical companies for 'cashing in' on our children's expense. How is it that 6 states have banned this preservative Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, New York and California. Obviously there is reason, and other countries have totally banned and people are surprised that American's are not heeding the warnings. It's obvious it's about money! BigPharma continues to make money with your aid (see Robert Kennedy's 6/2005 informative article - online). You need to point out why children under six months can't have the shot, but WHY IS IT OKAY for a woman's pregnant fetus' to be exposed - this makes no sense! Holly Stark should be worried and leary. Media continually manages to create a scare to get shots, this will only benefit BigPharma. Do you realize why BigPharma makes money out of the vials with Thimerosal? Do some research versus single vial preservative free. As a parent and Aunt of 2 autisic children, I need more.
I think their hope is eventually those autistic children will cash in again when they come up with an anecdote to counter what these shots (along with the environmental factors). It is a fact that lead and mercury cause neurological disorders and the point which many people seem to miss, is that NO, it's not just in the shots, but in our food, air etc. Therefore, as concerned/proactive parents we need to demand that company's such as Chiron produce only safe products, and be responsible to their customers. Haven't we learned that the government has also used "the burden of proof" must rely on us and our children are there guinea pigs. The CDC has no truth to offer the public and we now know that and I and others will make it a point of spreading the word. People such as Julie Gerberding at the CDC try to play down Mercury (Thimerosol), but parents like me won't hear of it, because there is PLENTY of scientific evidence she chooses to ignore.
In 1999, CDC & American Acad. of Pediatrics recommended removing mercury because there haven't been enough long term studies done on the dosage. They are doing nothing! When you factor in a child's dose and the exposure from food, fillings, breast milk, air and other household products that contain mercury - just what is really safe. Then factor in shots are combined and each parent might have passed on an auto immune deficiency, which is also believed in the equation - what is safe? It would be safe to say, they do not have the answers because no conclusive government long term studies have been done, but it's okay to test on our children as guinea pigs. Wrong, wrong wrong! So what, in 3 years they can turn around and say oh we concluded there is a need to remove Mercury, only because, they will have some anecdotal pill to market and profit from, to all those parents with children of Autism, ADHD etc. Simply staggering implication.
Also, the CDC has done no long term studies to disprove the current scientific evidence that is out there. The fact that in 1999 they recommended removing Mercury is mind boggling, and now it's okay - WHY??? What recent evidence do they have that concludes this information???? The CDC is lying to us! Doctor's used to recommend smoking in the 60's and 70's, but we now know better. Can't the same distinction arise once we break through the lying and coverup!
It is known that a small amount of mercury in flu vaccine still exceeds the U.S. EPA's daily safety threshold - how is in name of our children, is this allowed??? If someone has a bad accountant they get another, the same should be said with pediatrician's and parents need to research and question them.
Please implore parents to write or call their Senators on this important issue and have our Government think more of our children.
Suzanne Arena
Cranston, RI
For disclosure purposes, I am Mica Stark, husband of Holly Stark interviewed in this story. Holly & I spent (and continue to spend) considerable time discussing this topic. I commend NHPR for spending time covering this important public health issue/very personal matter.
Our experience over the past month in calling several pharmacists and physicians' offices was quite eye-opening. To begin with, no one has the flu vaccine in stock. (So, even if we did want Holly to get the vaccine, we might have trouble finding one.) Second, no one with whom Holly spoke knew anything (or very little) about the thirmerosal issue in vaccines. Unfortunately, it requires a considerable amount of time and persistence to research this issue and to educate health care providers about it.
In doing a little research, one quickly learns that for the current flu-season there are just a handful of pharma companies that are producing thirm-free vaccines; but knowing where those doses end up is anyones guess.
Thanks to the good work of a handful of citizens, Drs. and now some Congressmen/women, the link between thirmerosal and autism is getting more coverage. And also thanks to Imus (of Imus in the Morning), whose wife Diedre, is on top of this issue; they are frequently pressing public officials and top news reporters to dig deeper into this issue.
Call it “Mothers’ Intuitionâ€. Mounting toxicological and biological research has shown ethyl mercury, the mercury present in thimerosal, potentially damaging to the developing fetus.
It is very concerning that thimerosal is still in the flu vaccine given pregnant women. Currently, most states do not have a ban on giving pregnant women the 25 micrograms of mercury in the flu vaccine. Several years ago, over serious concerns, the 10.5 micrograms mercury was removed from the Rho-D shot given to the 16 percent pregnant women with Rh-negative blood. Now a much higher percentage of pregnant women may get the flu shot containing more than twice that amount of mercury. A recent EPA report found that the fetus accumulates mercury and typically has blood levels 70 percent higher than those found in the mother at the time of birth.
So why would the CDC recommend a mercury containing shot to pregnant women? That is a good question. As a chemical engineer with a background in FDA regulations and a parent of a child with Autism Spectrum Disorder, I set out to understand that issue along with the science on both sides of the thimerosal-autism link. I concluded that there is a link between the autism epidemic and the increase in mercury-containing vaccines in our children’s vaccination schedule. The fetal-thimerosal risk, is the highest risk of all.
Dr. John Iskander spoke of the massive study showing no relationship between children’s vaccines and autism and then when on to extrapolate that a “single dose of vaccine during pregnancy shouldn’t make a differenceâ€.
The flawed epidemiological studies that Dr. Iskander refers to are funded and conducted by the same federal agencies and medical establishments who approved the unprecedented increase in mercury-containing vaccines in our children’s vaccination schedule. “Mothers’ Intuition†is correct!
I think the writer should rephrase these questions:
Should she take a chance against the known damaging effects of the neurotoxins in vaccines?
Or should she risk being exposed to or maybe not to the speculative threats of the flu?
Even if you feel most children who are vaccinated are "healthy" you probably need to redefine your definition of health. Chronic sickness, ear infections, asthma, add. These are not "normal" childhood afflictions. And if you study communities that practice healthier lifestyles (including not vaccinating) you find this to be true.
You can read more in Dan Olmsted's article titled "The Age of Autism". He writes about an urban Chicago medical office that sees virtually none of these childhood afflictions and none of the children are vaccinated.
http://www.upi.com/ConsumerHealthDaily/view.php?StoryID20051204-060313-6...
I recommend every expectant mom to read this article. Also go to www.NVIC.org. I have two words for you: EDUCATE YOURSELF! Don't rely on your doctor to do it for you. I guarantee that the pharmaceutical sales rep in your obstetrician's office is better informed about the composition and effects of vaccines than your own doctor!
I found this article to be highly inaccurate and misleading.
First, because NO reproductive toxicity studies have been conducted to PROVE that any of the influenza vaccines are safe to give to pregnant women (and the manufacturers' package inserts clearly reflect this reality), any recommendation, including a CDC official's, to administer any such drug to a pregnant women borders on recommending medical mal practice.
[The article's "... Iskander says there are several studies showing that the flu vaccine did not cause birth defects" conveniently forgets to
mention:
a. NONE of these retrospective "case" studies have
any statistical validity because they only
"studied" a small number of pregnant women who
gave birth, and
b) Some had other problems,
which render the reported findings of these studies devoid of general validity.]
Second, Thimerosal is the compound used in most doses of the injectable flu vaccine and not "ethyl mercury" - a non-existant compound [factually, the proven mercury-containing breakdown product of Thimerosal is ethylmecurihydroxide].
Though the general toxicity of "methyl mercury"
(actually, methylmecuri-R in fish, where R is most probably some sulfur-containing amino acid and, in toxicity studies, R is hydroxide) and
ethyl- mecurihydroxide are similar, Thimerosal and ethylmecurihydroxide have much stronger immume and autoimmune stimulating effects than methyl- mecurihydroxide.
Since:
a. Studies have shown that ethylmecurihydroxide
not only crosses the placental barrier but
also preferentially accumulates in the fetus
(about 5 to 1), and
b. Other studies have shown that the developing
fetus is about 10 times as sensitive to mercury
poisoning than the adult,
a 50-kg mother getting a "50"-microgram dose of Thimerosal (releasing about
29 micrograms of
ethylmecurihydroxide) when the fetus weighs about 100 g could end up adding
12 micrograms mercury from that 29 micrograms to the growth environment of that 100-g fetus -- more than enough to mercury posion some of the developing fetus's systems to some degree and non-reversibly adding as much as
3 micrograms of mercury to the fetus' developing now about 15-900 g brain -- raising that brain's concentration of mercury by 0.2 to 0.003 ppm [neuron research studies have demonstrated neuron toxicity at mercury levels below
0.02 ppm on growing neuron neurites].
Thus, at least for some period of time, that mercury could be poisoning some neural processes and other systems in the brain.
In addition, even in a bad flu season in America, a society that does not wear masks to protect others from their infections and one that has lax hand and face washing practices, no more than about 50 % of the population gets the flu and less than
0.7 % of the population has a "bad" case of the flu [and most (> 75%) of these "bad" cases are on the elderly].
In addition, the effectiveness of the flu vaccines in those vaccinated varies from "0" % to about 55 % with an average effectiveness of about 36 %.
Therefore, getting vaccinated is, on average, a "1 in 3" (ranging from "0"
to about "1 in 2") protector WHEN a person is exposed to the flu virus.
Based on the peceding realities, why would any informed person want to get a flu shot?
Moreover, except to help the vaccine's manufacturer make more money and to promote another vaccine program, why would any CDC official be recommending that anyone should get this generally ineffective vaccine?
In addition, the statement, "And there was a massive study of several hundred thousand children showing no relationship between vaccines and autism," is not true -- the study in question, first found a significant relation between the level of mercury from thimerosal and the odds ratio
(risk) of autism where the odds ratio was greater than 2 (it was actually about 11); after several subsequent iterations and definition adjustments of that study deliberately designed to reduce the odds ratio, the final published version stated that the odds ratio for mercury in Thimerosal causing autism was about 1.3 per 12.5 micrograms of mercury (a non-standard expression designed to conceal the risk) and reported that the odds ratio is not large enough to be significant evidence for a link.
Independent studies in the VAERS database and subsets of the VSD have cinfirmed that there is a link between the level of mercury from Thimerosal injected and the risk of the clinical mercury poisoning symptoms diagnosed/labeled as the "causeless" disoder "autism."
Thus, contrary to thos article's propositions, the real questions for a pregnant woman should be:
Should she take a chance against the POSSIBLE, but rare, risks of a POSSIBLE "bad" case of the "flu"
that they may POSSIBLY contract?
Or should she add the known mercury load from Thimerosal in vaccines to the mercury burden her fetus is carrying and increase the risk of raising the fetus' mercury burden to the point that it significantly damages her fetus?
Lest the author reply that the amount of mercury added is the same as that from eating a can of tuna -- this reviewer notes that, for those who are normal, less than 20 % of the mercury ingested in fish is absorbed into the body.
Thus, if a can of tuna contains 27 micrograms of "methylmercury" (euivalent to 25 micrograms of "organic mercury" or 0.15 ppm mercury) a pregnant woman would have to eat at least five 6-oz (170-g) cans of tuna at once to absorb the same bolus of mercury as from one "Thimerosal Preserved" flu shot!
Thus, this reviewer must note:
1. No pregnant woman who understands the truth
about the influenza vaccine risks would get
a "Preserved" or "Thimerosal Preserved" flu
shot,
2. None of the flu vaccines has been proven (in
appropriate animal reproductive studies) to be
safe for administration during pregnancy, and 3. As Dr. Darshak Shankavi, another vaccine applogist,
recently wrote in his "The Secret Truth" article
published in the 4 Dec. 2005 edition of the Boston
Globe:
"To increase public acceptance of vaccines,
then, should health authorities spin the
facts to make the diseases seem deadlier
and the shots seem safer? The surprising
thing is that they already do."
or, in other words, ACCORDING to Dr. Shankavi,
health authorities, like Dr. Iskander from
the CDC, knowingly lie ("spin the facts") to
get people to take vaccines .
Hopefully, after reading the preceding and checking the facts, 1. All pregnant women (or women who are contemplating
getting pregnant) who read this posting will see
that getting mercury poisoned by a flu shot
should be avoided and,
2. If any such feel they need a flu shot THIS SEASON
(winter 2005-2006) and are not concerned that these
flu vaccines have not been proven to be safe for
the fetus (in appropriate toxicology studies),
they may want to:
a. Pay extra and get an Aventis "Preservative Free"
Fluzone "flu" shot if at all possible or,
b. If Option "a" is not available, take
GlaxoSmithKline's "Reduced Thimerosal" flu
vaccine Fluvarix, and
c. NOT take any other flu vaccine (i.e., the
"Preserved" Aventis FluZone and Chiron
"Thimerosal Preserved" Fluviron formulations
and the MedImmune Flumist, inhaled live
influenza vaccine).
Respectfully,
Dr. King
http://www.dr-king.com