Aluminium in vaccines

[bumbleymummy]

I thought this might do better with its own thread because the other one went off on a bit of a tangent.

On other threads it has been said that Aluminium is 'safe' in vaccines and that 'the dose makes the poison' .I'd just like to ask a few questions and maybe the people who have made those comments on the other threads will be able to answer them.

What is the 'dose that makes the poison' for Aluminium?

How much Aluminium is absorbed by the body from a vaccine?

We know that Aluminium is toxic and I found this from medscape 'if a significant load exceeds the body's excretory capacity, the excess is deposited in various tissues, including bone, brain, liver, heart, spleen, and muscle. This accumulation causes morbidity and mortality through various mechanisms.' So what is the excretory capacity for a child?

I've tried to find the answers to those questions myself.

Wrt what the toxic dose for Aluminium is I found this on the FDA website :

"Research indicates that patients with impaired kidney function, including premature neonates, who receive parenteral levels of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 [micro]g/kg/day accumulate aluminum at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity. Tissue loading may occur at even lower rates of administration."

I'm still looking for something that shows what the toxic dose for a healthy infant is. Does anyone else have a link?

Wrt how much Al is absorbed from vaccines. I've found this from medscape :

"In healthy subjects, only 0.3% of orally administered aluminum is absorbed via the GI tract and the kidneys effectively eliminate aluminum from the human body. It is only when the GI barrier is bypassed, such as intravenous infusion or in the presence of advanced renal dysfunction, that aluminum has the potential to accumulate. As an example, with intravenously infused aluminum, 40% is retained in adults and up to 75% is retained in neonates.[4]"

Obviously vaccines aren't given intravenously but they still bypass the GI tract so what percentage is retained? Anyone know?

I've also checked how much Al is in a dose of Pediacel (5 in 1) www.medicines.org.uk/emcmobile/medicine/15257/spc#PRODUCTINFOhere :

"Adsorbed on Aluminium Phosphate

1.5 mg (0.33 mg Aluminium)"

Does that mean there is 0.33mg (equivalent to 330 micrograms) in each dose?

If anyone has answers to these questions, please post them. I'm sure some of you must because you have posted that Aluminium is safe in vaccines. Links to any info are very much appreciated. TIA :)

You could do a sensitivity analysis on the ATSDR model to identify those parameters most compromising to the conclusions. You could then contact the ATSDR, explain the inadequacies you have found in their approach, and suggest future research priorities.

Or you could keep asking me to find you yet more papers.

Which ATSDR model are you talking about Jo?

Had we not mentioned ATSDR's work up until now? I quite thought we had. Perhaps you forgot. I believe this is the most up to date one.

If this one doesn't suit you, just choose any part of the research in which you've found failings, and contact the authors to explain where they've gone wrong and how they should proceed.

Or just keep asking me for links.

Are you talking about the MRLs? I don't have any problem with them. Or are you getting mixed up between the ATSDR and Keith et al/Priest et al?

It doesn't matter. Just choose any part of the research in which you've found failings, and contact the authors to explain where they've gone wrong and how they should proceed.

Ok, so you are getting mixed up. You haven't linked to the ATSDR report - did you mean this? I did link to it for you a few times earlier. I take it you didn't read it. I suppose that's why your recent posts haven't made much sense.

Oh but it does matter Jo. You aren't making any sense.

I don't mind which paper you pick. You could even do several. Just choose any part of the research in which you've found failings, and contact the authors to explain where they've gone wrong and how they should proceed.

I don't have any problem with the MRLs for oral Aluminium that were determined by the ATSDR. They looked at lots of studies and plenty of evidence that enabled them to establish what the 'safe' levels for oral exposure were. They didn't have enough information to determine MRLs for injected Al. Do you think they missed the study you linked to?

Have you found any inadequacies in any area of research into the safety of Al in vaccines?

You mean the lack of it?

No, I mean things which you feel the authors have overlooked, and which you have spotted.

Bumbley, as you point out, there is a great shortage of studies showing that turnips are safe. Surely, as my point is that I want to see convincing evidence that turnips are safe, that just strengthens my concern.

Why you should try to brush my concern aside just because there is an absence of evidence to convince me, I cannot understand. I don't believe there is any doubt whatsoever that a surfeit of turnips is dangerous, or even fatal. I don't know the fatal dose though, and I bet you don't either.

I am not actually saying that turnips are dangerous, you understand, I'm just saying that I haven't seen evidence to prove that they are safe.

Are you going to contact the ATSDR and tell them that they must have missed the study you linked to earlier because it proves that the levels of Al in vaccines is perfectly safe and that they should have been able to determine a MRL for injected Al based on it?

No PJ, I said there was a lack of any evidence that turnips are toxic. There is plenty of evidence that Al is toxic and that is why certain restrictions have been placed on IV fluids and oral intake. There have not been enough studies done to determine restrictions for Al in vaccines.

If there was evidence that eating a certain number of turnips every day was toxic then you would start looking for what 'safe' levels are, just as people do for Al. HTH :)

You question looks like an attempt to avoid my unanswered questions as to why you won't help improve vaccine safety. Why don't you want to help improve vaccine safety?

You're not answering mine either Jo. You've ignored quite a few now starting with:

"Do you not think that if there were enough studies and data to determine the safe level of Aluminium that can be injected that the ATSDR would have been able to determine a MRL for it specifically?"

Just bookmarking again.
I classed this thread amongst the sensible and adult-like until PJ started on about his turnips again.

Tabitha, you are very rude.

I am simply mentioning my concern about a product which is is common use but for which there is an absence of research showing it to be safe.

You are well aware that Bumble has an exactly parallel concerm.

Bumble

There is a lack of evidence that Turnips are safe. There is a lack of good-quality research to prove that Turnips do not cause lung cancer. The fact that they have been consumed by large numbers of people over a long period is not, as you will agree, evidence of safety.

Are you trying to suggest that I am not entitled to be concerned?

That makes us equal then, does it not? Now, I won't waste more time on this nonsense on this thread.

PJ, you must have missed my last post about turnips not being toxic (unlike Al) or maybe you just didn't understand it. I'm pretty sure my 6 year old could grasp that, but then he is very bright... :)

Best to ignore him/her I think Tab. S/he just kind of piggybacks on Jo and doesn't really seem to understand what is going on. I hope you are finding the rest of the thread interesting/informative. It's certainly been an eye-opener for me!

There has been a huge study on the safety of AL in vaccines. We (well most of us, our parents and our children) all took part. We had vaccines and there is no evidence of AL toxicity that I am aware of.
This does not give us a 'safe' level, but does show that the level used in vaccines is safe. As in all science, you cannot prove a negative, but there is more evidence in this study than in any research paper.

I don't remember having any tests to check my body burden of Al. Do you? Who knows how much Al I have accumulated in my body and what it is doing/may do to me in the future.

You don't have to prove a negative to determine what the 'safe' level of injectable Al is. They've managed to do it for oral administration and IV fluids. You do have to do the studies though.

bumble

what makes you allege that turnips are not toxic?

there is no doubt whatsoever that an surfeit of turnips is damaging and possibly fatal. You are claiming that there is no dangerous amount. This is not true.

Have you ever had a test to check your body burden of turnip? I think not. Who knows how much you have accumulated in your body and what it may do to you now or in the future?

What evidence do you have that it is safe? None.

Bumble

The studies show that AL comes from a number of sources. Over a lifetime, those from vaccines are minimal and peak in the infant. Therefore the peak level of AL from vaccines must be in the infant.
The number of infants vaccinated shoes that this level (whatever it is) does not cause harm in the short-term.
There is a possibility that this level is maintained in the body (I don't believe this, but willing to play). It is possible that this level causes long term damage. However, in the UK, mass vaccination is a least 40 years old, this damage does not play out over a 40 year cycle - will there be a problem after 60 years, 70 years?? No-one yet knows, but my betting is no.
Therefore this a valid scientific study which shows they are safe.
Note I have even mentioned the benefits of vaccination which would outweigh some level of risk.