Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any medical concerns we suggest you consult your GP.
Each dose of Cervarix contains 0.5 mg aluminium hydroxide: You can check at Page 12, line 300 - 303: www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM186981.pdf
'Gulf War Illness and the Health of Gulf War Veterans, Scientific Findings and Recommendations' states:
'Vaccines containing aluminium hydroxide adjuvant have also been associated with the development of macrophagic myofasciitis. This recently-identified condition is characterized by macrophageinfiltration of muscle tissue after receipt of vaccines. Patients develop arthromyalgias and fatigue, among other symptoms, with one report indicating that about half of macrophagic myofasciitis patients meet criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome.'
Page 119: www.va.gov/RAC-GWVI/docs/Committee_Documents/GWIandHealthofGWVeterans_RAC-GWVIReport_2008.pdf
I'd recommend you also read about the Canadian study on Page 119.
Page 119 is about anthrax vaccine and observations from workers in goat hair factories in the 1950ies - seem totally relevant for the infant immunisation schedule the report goes on to talk more about "deployment vaccines". The lengths anti-vaccine folk go into to "prove" aluminium is the new
black mercury are slightly tiresome...
With respect - further down the page - this is from Page 119:
'A recent Canadian study evaluated long-term effects of both squalene and aluminum hydroxide adjuvants on behavior and central nervous system tissues in a mouse model. Using dosages comparable to those used in human vaccines, animals received two injections, two weeks apart, of one of the adjuvants, both adjuvants combined, or placebo. They were then evaluated using a variety of neurobehavioral tests over a six month period, followed by histochemical analyses of brain and spinal cord tissues. Anti-squalene antibodies were found in 20% of animals injected with placebo, 27% of those injected with aluminum, 40% of those injected with squalene, but only 10% of those injected with both adjuvants. Overall, the aluminum adjuvant produced more adverse effects than placebo, squalene, or the combined adjuvants. After six months, mice injected with the aluminum adjuvant exhibited significant declines in muscle strength and endurance, and increased indicators of anxiety, compared to placebo. Aluminum adjuvant was also associated with indicators of increased central nervous system inflammation and motor neuron loss, as reflected by a significant increase (350%) in the number of reactive astrocytes in the lumbar spinal cord and neuronal apoptosis in the motor cortex and spinal cord. Investigators concluded that their findings were consistent with an association between aluminum adjuvants and neurological deficits, including ALS. By contrast, squalene adjuvant was associated with fewer changes in brain and behavior, none of which were statistically significant.'
Just to confirm that aluminium hydroxide was not removed:
The NHS refer to it as hydrated. Both hydrated (gel) and dehydrated (powder) aluminium hydroxide are aluminium hydroxide.
Here you can see aluminium hydroxide hydrate repeatedly referred to as aluminium hydroxide: www.sigmaaldrich.com/etc/medialib/docs/Aldrich/Product_Information_Sheet/a1577pis.Par.0001.File.tmp/a1577pis.pdf
Here's a very important point: Its not clear why the NHS felt that urge when both the manufacturer and the FDA were content to call it 'aluminium hydroxide'.
Surely they cannot have put an attempt to cover ahead of the health of potentially millions of 12 year old girls?
'Stand your ground and fight
You know that our cause is right' - Motorhead, Heroes.
Gulf War Illness is an umbrella term that covers various ailments. The available evidence is that aluminium hydroxide in vaccine is one.
aluminium has been used as an adjuvent for 70 odd years with no reason to believe it causes any harm. Aluminium is in your every day foods and the amount in vaccines never has exceeded the allowable body burden even for tiny babies.
'..there are preliminary indicators, from both human and animal studies, that aluminum hydroxide adjuvant may be associated with neurological damage and chronic symptoms potentially relevant to the health of Gulf War veterans.'
I'm finding it difficult to determine the history of aluminium hydroxide in vaccine as 'aluminium adjuvant' is ambiguous.
When you eat aluminium hydroxide, you excrete it.
"potentially relevant to the health of Gulf War veterans "
not British teenagers - what do you want, Orphadeus?
Preferably a comment from someone who doesn't appear to think Gulf War veterans and teenage girls are a different species.
I've been trying to find out when the onset of Gulf War Illness typically began, as I have read about it being after the soldiers had returned. This might not be the best source -
'Symptoms began immediately in some cases, but mostly they have appeared 6 months to 6 years after the time of exposure.
- yet that might be correct.
Do you really think anyone will take you seriously linking to homeopathy site
aluminium safety and why not to listen to scaremongerers
aluminium WHO advice on aluminium adjuvants
workshop on aluminium in vaccine safety
Aluminum toxicokinetics regarding infant diet and vaccinations.
Updated aluminum pharmacokinetics following infant exposures through diet and vaccination.
lots of information on aluminium in vaccines in these papers.
Orphadeus - I know teenagers and I know Gulf War vets - there is a difference in "stuff" they have been exposed to, I can assure you.
We can put it in a nutshell. 'Gulf War Illness and the Health of Gulf War Veterans, Scientific Findings and Recommendations' states:
'Aluminum adjuvants have been used in vaccines for over 60 years, and are considered to have a good safety record. Vaccines containing aluminum adjuvants have been extensively studied in humans and animals for both effectiveness and adverse effects, but very little research has specifically looked at neurological effects of vaccine adjuvants, an area of particular interest in relation to Gulf War illness.'
Page 119: www.va.gov/RAC-GWVI/docs/Committee_Documents/GWIandHealthofGWVeterans_RAC-GWVIReport_2008.pdf
Then it goes on to the more recent studies.
The links Bruffin has given are the work of charlatans referring to old hat while wilfully ignoring new research.
There is also an issue as to what the old aluminium adjuvants were. Aluminium adjuvant may refer to aluminium hydroxide, aluminium phosphate or potassium aluminium sulfate.
The last point was 'old research shows aluminium adjuvants are safe' could be referring to aluminium phosphate or potassium alimunium sulfate.
I am highlighting a claim:
'There have been many reported cases of ill-effects and mystery illnesses from the Cervarix vaccine, especially autoimmune and nervous system problems and chronic fatigue, although there is no official count of side effects in the UK. On the NHS Choices website I counted over a dozen reports of long standing disability following the vaccination. These families had found that conventional medicine was not able to help them. Most doctors were reported to have dismissed any connection between the symptoms and the HPV vaccine, even when the pain, collapse, fainting etc occurred only 48 hours after the injection.'
If it is normally between 6 months and 6 years later that symptoms appear, we may be looking at an epidemic.
The Telegraph way back in 2009:
'This week, relief of sorts arrived for the Steele family in the shape of a government report detailing the 1,340 instances of adverse reactions to the vaccine, Cervarix. Some girls have suffered paralysis, others convulsions; and some, like Carly, have experienced sight problems (in addition, Carly has now developed severe heat intolerance). Nausea, muscle weakness, fever, dizziness and numbness have also been reported.'
You link to homeopathic and holistic website sthen talk about my links which are based on the latest research as chaletains
I spent some time trying to find when the symptoms of Gulf War Illness typically appeared. The homeopathic site was the only site I could find with solid information. I pretty much apologized for that in that post. If you can find a better source with information as to when the symptoms typically appeared, I would be thankful.
As for the observation on the holistic website, I was highlighting it.
You come across as a hired hand.
'It is important to note that the great majority of infections with high-risk HPV types go away on their own and do not cause cancer.'
Does cancer cause HPV?
I really don't know what you are wittering on about.
Hpv causes cervical cancer. Cervarix will protect against the 2 major strains. Its all immaterial as the no longer use cervarix in the UK and have moved over to gardasil which protect against 4 strains.
Gardasil only has 225ug of aluminum if it worries you.
Not sure why you are trying to compare cervarix with anthrax vaccines when the infant schedule has vaccines with similar amounts of aluminum and as said above there is no reason to believe these amounts cause a problem.
OP did you do any chemistry at school?
An aluminium compound is not aluminium.
Sodium is a metal that is so reactive it's powdered form can spontaneously combust.
Chlorine is a poisonous gas used as a weapon in WWI.
Combine them and you get something many people are happy to put on chips.
You will ingest more aluminium if you eat a tuna sandwich than from a vaccine.
They are actively participating in arguably the biggest crime to have taken place within the UK this century.
I have been very polite considering what they are doing.
Yes folks, the apparatchiks have basically assured you that 'Gulf War Illness and the Health of Gulf War Veterans, Scientific Findings and Recommendations' is a homeopathic conspiracy theorist site.
With regard to Bruffin's assertion that HPV causes cervical cancer, I am unaware of any evidence. There does to be a correlation between cervical cancer and HPV, for which there are at least 3 possible explanations.
1. Cancer causes HPV.
2. HPV causes cancer.
3. HPV is very common and people more likely to get cancer are less likely to shake off HPV.
If anyone has any evidence of which (logic rather than assertion), please post.
'BERLIN, May 31, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Most condoms contain a potent carcinogen, N-Nitrosamine, a German research facility revealed Friday. Of 32 types tested, 29 contained the cancer-causing chemical at highly elevated levels, up to three times what could be found in food, the study showed. Study scientists, who conducted the research at The Chemical and Veterinary Investigation Institute in Stuttgart, Germany, said N-Nitrosamine is one of the most carcinogenic substances, as reported by the Reuters news service. There is a pressing need for manufacturers to tackle this problem, the scientists recommended. The chemicals purpose is to increase the elasticity of latex rubber, and is released when a condom comes in contact with body fluids.'
Thanks for the link (both the same). Unfortunately the graphs in the first link are rather small so difficult to decipher. However, it does say regarding the rise in the incidence of throat cancer in white males under 50 who do not drink or smoke:
'This malignant disease is associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) 16 infection.'
That does not make clear whether a carcinogen in condoms is involved, and does not make clear whether throat cancer causes HPV 16.
I've just found this:
'A study by the CDC on prevalence of HPV 16 in the US showed that the prevalence of HPV-16 was at least two-fold higher in women compared to men. Women of all races had an HPV-16 prevalence of 17.9 percent, compared to 8 percent for men.'
Either men tend to shake it off quicker..
Whatever - look at the high incidence - it is entirely logical that people more likely to get cancer are less likely to shake it off.
Interesting the way the OP has been criminally sabotaged. Bearing in mind potentially children may die as a consequence..
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.