Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Mercury free vaccines

38 replies

bolekilolek · 16/02/2004 17:07

What is the name of mercury free vaccine given to babies at 2,3 and 4 months old . Does anyone know ? My DD has just gotten 1 set of jabs , unf. containing thiomersal ( mercury .. ) but I wanna make sure that next time it is not gonna happen. Why on earth the doctor said nothing about dangesrs of giving babies such a big dose of mercury in one go ? I only realised how dangerous it is after reading few messages at mumsnet ( go to health then discussion about vaccines ... ) and checking internet .

OP posts:
twiglett · 16/02/2004 17:48

message withdrawn

Angeliz · 16/02/2004 17:57

Does anyone know this? My dd had DTaP instead of DTwP at all her baby jabs, after researching it i was glad as i think that one doesn't have mercury in it. Is that right or is it only certain "makes" that don't have it in??
(Sorry to go off course bolekilolek, i guess it's the same question really!! I totally agree with you about not being told! It was only when i started reading up that i realised what "may" have been injected into dd. It's a damn disgrace in my opinion that parents aren't told all the facts!)++

Oakmaiden · 16/02/2004 18:04

infanrix, or something....

Angeliz · 16/02/2004 18:11

Oakmaiden thats right i just checked but can't do a link!!!!

Angeliz · 16/02/2004 18:13

sigh!

Angeliz · 16/02/2004 18:18

this?

Angeliz · 16/02/2004 18:18

About two thirds of the way down it expains about not having thimerisol.

bolekilolek · 16/02/2004 18:42

Got if ! INFANRIX - us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_infanrix.pdf

OP posts:
Davros · 08/04/2004 17:55

Just picked this up from the Schafer Autism Report - for more info see here

Weldon/Maloney Bill Eliminates Mercury Exposure for Children and Developing Fetuses Legislation Would Ban Mercury from Vaccines

[News From Dave Weldon Florida's 15th District -- Serving Brevard, Indian River, Osceola, and Polk Counties.]

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Reps. Dave Weldon, M.D. (R-FL) and Carolyn Maloney (DNY),introduced legislation to eliminate mercury from vaccines. Given the increasing concerns about mercury exposures and our ability to eliminate this particular exposure, this bill completes actions begun five years ago to ban mercury from vaccines.
?[The] Public Health Service, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and vaccine manufacturers agree that thimerosal-containing vaccines should be removed as soon as possible,? stated the proclamation issued in July 1999. Yet five years later thimerosal - 50% mercury - remains in some non-routine childhood vaccines. The government is poised to recommend the flu vaccine later this year without recommending that infants and pregnant women get the mercury-free version of the inoculation.
?This legislation is necessary to ensure that we don't roll back the clock when it comes to eliminating this mercury exposure to developing fetuses and infants,? said Rep. Weldon,a physician. ?We can eliminate this exposure now and it is inexcusable not to.?
?It's a simple concept: kids shouldn't be given anything that's toxic,?
said Maloney. ?Who would argue against that? Vaccines can be made without mercury, so why not remove the mercury and remove any doubt??
Mercury is a neurotoxin and is particularly harmful to the developing central nervous system of fetuses and infants. In January the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)issued a report finding that 1-in-6 infants is born with a blood mercury level above the level considered safe by the EPA. Furthermore, the Food and Drug Administration and the EPA recently warned that pregnant women and young children limit their consumption of certain fish in order to reduce mercury exposures.

H.R. 4169:

  • Requires that by Jan 1, 2005, no childhood vaccine have more than 1 microgram (mcg) of mercury;
  • Requires that the flu vaccine administered to children, beginning later this year with the 2004/05 flu season, have no more than 1 mcg of mercury;
  • Requires that by Jan 1, 2006, mercury be removed completely from all childhood and adolescent vaccines; and
  • Requires that for all adult vaccines - no vaccine may contain more than 1 mcg of mercury after January 1, 2007;
  • Expresses the Sense of the Congress that the CDC should incorporate into its vaccine promotion messages, a recommendation against administering a mercurycontaining vaccine to pregnant women. ,,
AussieSim · 08/04/2004 18:40

I asked my doctor about my concerns with MMR and wanting seperate vacinations and not wanting any with Mercury and she nearly laughed at me and I think she was condescending (hard to tell as she was speaking fairly rapid german). Anyway she said there was only the one option and that was to have the MMR. So now I am mobilising all local resources to trying to figure out what the situation is over here. She said not to worry that my DS 14mths had plenty of time till he had to have it anyway - which I thought was a bit weird too.

maomao · 08/04/2004 19:15

There was also this, which ran in The Scotsman:

The Scotsman
March 13, 2004

Britain - where medics still inject mercury into babies

FRASER NELSON

WHILE Britain has spent years worrying about links between autism and
the MMR jab, a far more serious threat has been gathering - involving
one of the oldest and most lethal poisons on earth: mercury.

It is a proven neurotoxin, so strong that the contents of a thermometer could pollute a small lake, yet Britain?s NHS is still using it in a cheap triple DTP jab. The defence is not that mercury makes the vaccine work better - the ingredient is used simply as a preservative, to give it a longer shelf life. UK officials say there is "no evidence" that mercury is linked to autism, and there is no cause to remove it from routine vaccinations.

But Britain is now understood to be the only developed country in the world to take this view. From Japan to the United States, mercury has been withdrawn from the child vaccination schedule precisely on the ground that doubts exist about its safety.

The debate is not about whether the vaccines should be administered: mercury-free jabs are available on the NHS - and, in Scotland, to anyone who demands them. Nor is it a scientific argument restricted to the domain of experts: parents? groups consistently argue that it does not require a PhD in chemistry to establish that mercury should not be injected into the body of a eight-week-old baby.

It is instead an argument about whether parents should be told what is in the vaccine - and whether they should be given the power to decide which vaccination is best for their child.

The NHS uses a DTwP vaccine bought from a company called Aventis. Unless parents say otherwise, this is the vaccine which will be issued. It protects against diphtheria, tetanus and whole-cell pertussis (whooping cough). The wP means a whole dose of dead pertussis toxin, in a small enough dose for the infant?s immune system to learn about the disease, and how to protect against it.

As a preservative, DTwP uses thimerosal - sometimes spelt thiomersal -which is 49.6 per cent ethyl mercury. Each injection contains 25 micrograms of mercury - which means 75 micrograms over the three-jab course in the first 16 weeks of the baby?s life.

The mercury-free alternative, also ordered by the NHS, is called
Infanrix, produced by GlaxoSmithKline. The diphtheria and tetanus components are the same - the difference is that it does not use whole-cell pertussis. This is a crucial distinction.

In the 1970s, research was published suggesting that the whole-cell pertussis was linked to neurological disorders. This led to a worldwide scare and parents left infants unvaccinated, rather than risk the jab.

Medical authorities the world over had outbreaks of whooping cough on their hands. The decision was taken to produce a new type of vaccine which allayed parents? concerns.

Scientists? response was to use only the components of the pertussis vaccine which were absolutely necessary to provide immunisation. The result was acellular pertussis - DTaP.

Infanrix is part of the new generation of DTP jabs. Its components - pertussis toxin, filamentous haemagglutinins and pertactin - are purified and detoxified then included in the jab.

This process is naturally more expensive than just including whole cells of the pertussis bacillus. So Infanrix costs about twice as much as DTwP - which has made it prohibitively expensive to the third world vaccination programmes carried out by the World Health Organisation.

Infanrix is by no means the only DTaP on the market. There are scores of products made by various manufacturers - each competing with the others on effectiveness ratings and how few side effects are produced.

There is far less competition making DTwP jab - which is regarded in the richest countries as old technology whose time has passed. Also, there is no medical need to use mercury as a preservative when the new DTaP vaccines have none.

This is perhaps why the DTwP does not have a brand name. It is not, by and large, something any parent would request over DTaP - even though statistics comparing the two are hard to extract from the UK health service.

All vaccines are tested against each other, in studies normally
involving tens of thousands of children. In each test which has ever been performed, Infanrix - and every DTaP vaccine - has been given a far superior "safety profile" than DTwP.

This has nothing to do with mercury. The problem is the so-called "junk cells" which exist in the whole-cell pertussis vaccine, but have been taken out of the DTaP jab. They are found to trigger a range of unpleasant and unnecessary side effects in infants.

Even in the hotly-contested world of vaccine wars, it is now beyond dispute that infants injected with DTwP are far more likely to suffer fever, convulsions or show protracted crying that could last for up to two days. All of these are triggered by the "junk cells".

Data filed in the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm shows that the
figures vary - some say that babies are three times as likely to suffer convulsions after the DTwP jab, some say 1.8 times more likely. But none dispute the trouble caused by junk cells.

Britain?s defence - behind the use of mercury, as well as junk cells - is that the DTwP vaccine works better against whooping cough. The Department of Health argues that a child given DTaP is "twice as likely" to contract whooping cough.

But no studies quoted by the government directly compare the two vaccines which Britain is actually using. In any case, one study -conducted a decade ago - showed the likelihood of whooping cough was one in a thousand with DTwP and two in a thousand with DTaP. These are the odds.

David Geier, one of the scientists who produced a recent report
suggesting a link between thimerosal and autism, said that debate has moved on since 1994 and the UK no longer needs reports.

"Look at the United States. Look at Japan. They have both been using DTaP for years - and do we see any outbreak of whooping cough there? It now doesn?t matter what a few studies found - we can look at entire countries."

This article:

news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=289992004

Autism:

news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=702

MMR vaccine:

news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=91

Websites:

UKMI's list of mercury vaccines

WideWebWitch · 08/04/2004 19:42

What a very clear and interesting article Maomao, thanks for posting it. Dd has had Infanrix and will be for the next 2 too. Although I'm spreading them all out over a longer time than they ask you to.

maomao · 08/04/2004 19:48

Oops, sorry about the reformatting of the article. I thought I'd taken out all the hard returns.

WWW, glad to hear that you went with Infanrix. I wish I'd looked into this issue for my daughter---it didn't dawn on me that jabs here would have mercury.

kiwisbird · 08/04/2004 19:58

I must have said something that my HV heard, she said to me when booking the vacc's (I took DD late due to worries as DS had convulsions and the like)
She had ordered infanrix anyway... I assumed it was standard - amazing that she heard me if this is the case!

Paula71 · 08/04/2004 20:51

While reading up on the MMR jab when pregnant with ds twins (now 2) I came across this and was far more worried. I tried to say in some MMR topic about this being a bigger concern but was shot down in flames for dismissing the MMR research. I have wondered if people who spent sleepless nights over the MMR even passed a thought on these vaccines as there hasn't been as big a hoo-ha in the media.

I asked for and got Infanrix for them, no problems at all. Trouble is, if I hadn't asked I wouldn't have got and that, in my opinion, was a disgrace knowing what large doses of mercury can do in any situation. (Reading the Scotsman article there, I didn't demand them, I just expressed concern to my HV who said this is what is available and I naturally chose Infanrix.)

kiwisbird · 08/04/2004 21:05

trust me paula most of us know both

hercules · 08/04/2004 21:09

Can someone clarify this for me please?
dd had the normal jabbs when she was a few months old - i didnt know about the bloody mercury.
The mmr she has when she is one - can i ask for tht without mercury on the nhs?

tamum · 08/04/2004 21:17

Hercules, I'm pretty sure that the MMR doesn't contain mercury anyway, I think it's the DTP that does.

maomao · 08/04/2004 21:22

Yes, tamum is right.

samwifewithkid · 09/04/2004 00:12

It's unbelieveable that Mercury is contained in these jabs, I wish I'd known before my dd was vaccinated! Is this a practice that has been used for years? or relatively modern?

If modern, what are the long term effects of this?

Jimjams · 09/04/2004 14:10

sam- mercury containing vaccine have been used for years. The thing that has changed is the interval over which they are given. So the dtp used to be given over the course of the first year. With the introduction of the MMR the timing of other vax changed and dtp was given at 2,3 and 4 months.

If you type Walsh metallothionein and autism into google you get some interesting research.

hercules · 09/04/2004 14:45

So can I have the mmr done in intervals? I want dd to have it but the safest way.

hercules · 09/04/2004 14:46

I agree with Sam. How dare they not tell us they were injecting mercury into our babies! I wish I had researched this as I do most things but I stupidly thought it must be okay as you dont really hear about thses injections just the mmr.

Swipe left for the next trending thread