Showing posts with label vaccines. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vaccines. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Thimerosal

As my I approach the deadline for my annual TB test, I am trying to find answers to my questions about the chemicals used in the formula.  One of the questions I was trying to find an answer to is: "If mercury is so bad for us via fish consumption, then why is it okay in vaccines?".  Honestly, I did not find a comforting answer to that question.  What I learned is that there are a few different forms of mercury.  The kind in our vaccines is called ethylmercury, and the kind we ingest through eating fish is methylmercury.  Most studies to date have focused on methylmercury.  The results of these studies have revealed many toxic effects on developing fetus' and young children.

When reviewing the chemical summary on organic mercury provided in the TEACH database (which is a database of information about chemicals, provided by the Environmental Protection Agency)  I discovered that there is very little research on ethylmercury, while there is quite a bit of research on methylmercury.  For methylmercury, the U.S. EPA Reference Dose (RD) for chronic oral exposure is .00001 mg/kg-day and the ATSDR Minimal Risk Level (MRL) is .00003 mg/kg-day.  These exposure limits were last updated in 2001 and 1999, respectively.  To my shock, there were no toxicity references even available for ethylmercury.  I am assuming that is due to the lack of research that is readily available.  The summary of methylmercury studies reported the following findings:
  • methylmercury has been shown to cross the placenta and has been measured in breast milk
  • frequent eating of fish has been linked to mercury levels being 40 times the national average
  • studies reported mild-to-moderate impairments detected in visual and behavioral tests of children that were associated with mercury or methylmercury blood concentrations
  • high-dose, prenatal exposure to methylmercury has been linked to increased incidence of still births and miscarriages, several developmental disabilities, and other adverse neurological effects in children of exposed mothers
  • children and adults exposed to methylmercury have developed a disorder called acrodynia, manifested by symptoms of: leg cramps, irritability, peeling of skin and hands, nose, and feet; fever, sweating, excessive salivation, sleeplessness, photobia, and/or weakness
  • impaired growth of children was significantly associated with maternal exposure to methylmercury during pregnancy
(The source for the above findings is: www.epa.gov/teach/chem_summ/mercury_org_summary.pdf)

Another interesting thing is that the CDC states on their website that Thimersol (ethylmercury) is eliminated from the body easily and that data from studies shows no convincing evidence of harm.  When I went to examine their references, they are all AT LEAST 10 years old, with some references dating back to 1980!!!  Not to mention, there are only 7 references listed.  First of all, there are few studies that examine ethylmercury alone, which might be a reason for the lack of data suggesting harm.  Like I mentioned before, there is so little data that even the EPA doesn't have enough evidence or research to make a recommended toxicity reference.  Secondly, in a newer article published in 2005 they did report that ethlymercury cleared more rapidly than methylmercury... BUT the proportion of inorganic mercury in the brain was twice as high in the ethylmercury (the type of mercury in Thimerosol) group.  It was further noted that inorganic mercury remains in the brain much longer than organic mercury, and has a half-life of MORE THAN A YEAR!  It goes on to state that "it's not currently known whether inorganic mercury presents any risk to the developing brain".  So, it looks to me that while there might not be any compelling evidence to show us that Thimerosol is harmful, there most certainly isn't any evidence showing us that it's effects are safe. 

References:
1) http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1280369
2) http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.7712

Monday, January 2, 2012

For Healthcare Workers: Vaccinations & Your Rights

For many healthcare workers it is now "required" that you receive the flu shot.  I personally believe that it should be one's right to choose what they put in their body and that no employer should require vaccination.  That said, here are some links that can help you object to the annual flu vaccine requirement:
  • If you work in a healthcare facility, this page on the CDC website will tell you whether you are able to use a medical, philosophical, or religious exemption.  For Marylanders, the site lists the following info:
    • For Maryland, for religious exemptions to the immunization requirements of MD. Regs. Code tit. 10, § 06.01.12 (regarding rubella) and MD. Regs. Code tit. 10, § 06.01.15 (regarding rubella), see MD. Regs. Code tit. 10, § 06.01.12 and MD. Regs. Code tit. 10, § 06.01.15. MD. Regs. Code tit. 10, § 06.01.12 and MD. Regs. Code tit. 10, § 06.01.15 provide that if a worker objects to the immunization on the grounds that it conflicts with the worker’s bona fide religious beliefs and practices, the hospital shall grant a religious exemption. 
  • According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), under the heading "Reasonable Accommodation & Religion", it indicates:
    • The law requires an employer to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause difficulty or expense for the employer. This means an employer may have to make reasonable adjustments at work that will allow the employee to practice his or her religion, such as allowing an employee to voluntarily swap shifts with a co- worker so that he or she can attend religious services.
  • Title VII
    • Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act requires employers to reasonably accommodate their employees' religious beliefs, as long as it does not cause undue hardship.
  • MD Health General  Code Ann. § 18-403:
    • HEALTH-GENERAL 
                   TITLE 18. DISEASE PREVENTION                    SUBTITLE 4. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
                   Md. HEALTH-GENERAL Code Ann. § 18-403 (2007)
                   § 18-403. Religious exemption
      • (a) In general. -- Unless the Secretary declares an emergency or disease epidemic, the Department may not require the immunization of an individual if:
      • (1) The individual objects to immunization because it conflicts with the individual's bona fide religious beliefs and practices; or
      • (2) The individual is a minor and the individual's parent or guardian objects to immunization because it conflicts with the parent or guardian's bona fide religious beliefs and practices.
      • (b) Rules and regulations. -- The Secretary shall adopt rules and regulations for religious exemptions under this section.

Additional Resources: