RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2020.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $1800Goal: $3000

Talk:Thiomersal

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I must say I like this page and will add to it:)--TimS 16:20, 8 January 2008 (EST)

For the sake of BON[edit]

Lol BON, did I ever say that Hg was not toxic? No, the Hg that I held in my hands, not the same form in vaccines, was toxic but the amount absorbed through the skin was not enough to cause an effect. You are trying to make a case where one does not exist. No one here claims the Hg is not toxic just that the amount that is in the vaccine, in the form of ethyl-Hg, is not enough to cause the harm that people are claiming that it does without actual research. As for studies, yes there have been studies to show that thimerosal is safe in small amounts, the question is often used by anti-vaccination groups is on the long term effects and is there a link with the use in vaccines and autism. Really, look at what you are claiming and look at the information provided. You can see for yourself.--TimS 14:44, 9 January 2008 (EST)

If you're up to it, Tim, do you want to work on Fluoridation?162.82.215.199 14:47, 9 January 2008 (EST)
I must say I am not that well read on Fluoridation to offer anything solid. My thiomersal background is due to an active research intrest in the topic. I am wanting to validate the claims once and for all with some hard evidence instead of the play on stats. I actually disagree with the article claiming no link with Thiomersal and autism since the research was performed by pulling a database instead of using controlled settings. I can make manipulate stats to show that a dog is the cousin of a bird. What is important is to understand how thiomersal is metabolized and where it all goes. No one has done that yet however the link of autism and thiomeral is unfounded. (not to mention the link of Hg and autism since you do not hear of many gold mine workers in south america developing autism, BTW Hg was used in the mining in large amounts).--TimS 15:01, 9 January 2008 (EST)
There's a large article in January 2008 edition of Scientic American about fluoride. There are concerns about overconsumption of fluoride as there are significant affluent dietary contributors which may increase daily intake above the recommended levels. Jollyfish.gifGenghis Marauding 15:15, 9 January 2008 (EST)
Thiomersal, like fluoridation, is simply another way to render us detectable to spy satellites. - The Question...but what is the answer? 10:34, 10 January 2008 (EST)
"I can make manipulate stats to show that a dog is the cousin of a bird." Um... I know it's kind of old to be responding to, however... dogs are cousins of birds... not recent cousins, but unless we're going to start arguing against common decent, I think we're pretty safe saying that dogs are cousins to birds. So, um... can has better analogy? --Eira omtg! The Goat be praised. 20:26, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

(undent) We're already detectable, aren't we? SusanPrunes and custard 10:47, 10 January 2008 (EST)

Ah, but detection by thiomersal, unlike fluoridation, can't be blocked by aluminum foil. The real problem is, as you allude to, that these aren't the only two means of spy satellite detection. The plastic tips at the ends of shoelaces are called aglets, their true purpose is sinister. - The Question...but what is the answer? 10:57, 10 January 2008 (EST)
My aglets are metal! SusanPrunes and custard 11:03, 10 January 2008 (EST)
THOSE ARE EVEN WORSE!!!1111one1!1!! You've got to destroy them in acid immediately. - The Question...but what is the answer? 10:06, 11 January 2008 (EST)

From WIGO Talk[edit]

That's just a dumb WIGO; autism is a developmental disorder, so using the "40 year olds" analogy makes no sense. As thimerosal is linked also with immunity defects, neurological defects and motor defects, ask instead how many over 40s suffer from those... Oh, right - lots of em. 89.241.165.169 21:46, 7 January 2008 (EST)

UnAmendededed.CЯacke®
Why did you remove it? It was hilarious! I like Schlafly calling an AP wire story "flat out wrong" just because he disagrees with it. And the original way it read made total sense. The story is about autism, not those other issues. Also, just because thimerasol is in vaccines does not make it the cause of some or all of these maladies. Please put it back, feel free to reword it if you want to appease our exalted user:bunchofnumbers. humanUser talk:Human 22:02, 7 January 2008 (EST)
Not only that, but of course he's almost certainly wrong. According to the Johns Hopkins Institute for Vaccine Safety, three of the six 2007/2008 influenza vaccines contain thiomersal and even then only less than .01% of the formulation. Unfortunately, I'm not able to find information about the percentage of the market that each variant holds. Stile4aly 22:09, 7 January 2008 (EST)

Schlafly was hilarious - he called the story flat out wrong for saying some flu shots used thimerosal - and thereby effectively dodged the fact that when thimerosal was completely removed - the rates of the defects remained the same.--Danielfolsom 22:17, 7 January 2008 (EST)

I put it back on the list - if we can think of a better way to phrase it that would be cool. humanUser talk:Human 22:27, 7 January 2008 (EST)
While we have you here buncha...do you have a cite for your contention that "thimerosal is linked also with immunity defects, neurological defects and motor defects". Thanks. CЯacke® 22:32, 7 January 2008 (EST)
I bet there's thumbersaults in my Scotch!!! Hmm, which reminds me, I have a reputation to keep ruined... humanUser talk:Human 22:38, 7 January 2008 (EST)
Sorry, I logged after commenting so didn't see your request for cites. Try these: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] 89.241.165.169 08:29, 8 January 2008 (EST)
Bunch of numbers, I think it should be pointed out that many of the links you listed do not provide any actual research outside of statistical correlation (Which does not allow for a controlled environment). Dr. Baylock for example has made millions off this hysteria over the past several years and can not be considered a reliable source due to his conflict of interest. People often hypothesize while giving interviews and hence the reason why research papers are required for the science community to move on a topic. To this date there are no papers that provide a definitive link, just statistical data in an uncontrolled environment. This does not mean there is or is not a link just, that there should be some investigation. I am currently writing a grant to investigate ethyl-Hg crossing the blood brain barrier. Perhaps this bit of research may help us to understand if there truly is a risk. Most of the hysteria is based on the EPA using methyl-Hg guidelines for ethyl-Hg toxicity standards which we know are unfounded since they are metabolized differently in the body. BTW ethyl-Hg is the form of Hg in the vaccine.--TimS 09:46, 8 January 2008 (EST)
"We can’t do with humans what we do with rats and other animals; we can’t sacrifice them and look at their organs, put them in a real tight cage and feed them or not feed them or expose them. So it’s very difficult to absolutely prove anything in a human disease. However, the data for mercury toxicity causing problems is paramount. It makes everything else pale to insignificance" 89.241.165.169 10:11, 8 January 2008 (EST)
I dunno, given the choice of taking a vaccine that might have dangerous stuff in it or the real chance of having smallpox...I think I'ma gonna takes my chances with the vaccine. Besides, I've already got amalgam fillings. Elemental mercury is bad, but even alchemists, who were forever playing with the stuff, didn't seem to notice. Much. (Except, you know, thems what went mad). CЯacke® 11:37, 8 January 2008 (EST)
My point isn't that vaccines are a "bad thing", but that mercury is - there is no reason for the pharm corporations to leave the preservative in, except COST! It cuts their profits to have to do so, and they would have to produce only single dose vials instead of multi-dose vials. Sheesh, what makes you think I don't want to see everyone who is at risk receive a shot?? Iz it coz I iz relijuss? You people are dumb sometimes. 89.241.165.169 13:30, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Bunch of numbers, you are mistaken. We use animals as models for determining the possible pathways then we use clinical trials to determine the pathways in humans. We do test humans once we see the safety of the pathways in the animals. You also seem to not understand the difference in forms of Hg. Organic Hg vs. elemental Hg. I have held Hg in my hand as a child from a broken thermometer. Considering the length of time I was exposed to my age compared to my current state of health, that form of Hg was not as toxic as say methylized Hg which kills with just a drop on the skin. To group all forms of Hg in as toxic is either a gross generalization or a sign of ignorance of chemical principles on your part. Oh and as a side note, it is a common misconception that sucrose from a plant is different than sucrose synthesized in the lab. This is false due to the molecule of sucrose is the same no matter the origins.--TimS 11:42, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Don't patronise me, thanks. Before I continue - quote: "BTW ethyl-Hg is the form of Hg in the vaccine". Hm, isn't it actually just Hg mercury? It is metabolized to ethylmercury, rather than methylmercury, which is the metabolite resulting from mercury exposure via ingestion. Besides which, thimerosal, ethylmercury, and methylmercury all are known to be toxic to the kidneys and CNS. Anyway. While you seem content to push the spin along the lines of "no conclusive evidence exists to show that ethylmercury is toxic", (which it is) isn't it a fact that no preclinical or clinical studies have ever been conducted to specifically examine the safety of thimerosal at the doses found in multiple infant and childhood vaccines? So, actually, there is no conclusive evidence because there were no studies! quote: "I have held Hg in my hand as a child from a broken thermometer." Would you drink it? Or innoculate yourself with it? Not a huge dose, just the amount from a thermometer. After all, it's - according to you - not dangerous... Or were you making a "gross generalization", or demonstrating your "ignorance of chemical principles"? 89.241.165.169 13:19, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Bunch of Numbers, again you are incorrect. Hg is mercury, yes but the form of the Hg in the vaccine is what matters and that is ethyl-Hg. Hg is not metabolized into ethyl-Hg. BTW the metabolization of Hg is pretty constant no matter where it is absorbed in the body so ingestion vs. skin absorption only changes the rate of absorption into the body. You are once again stating a gross generalization when you make the claim "Besides which, thimerosal, ethyl mercury, and methyl mercury all are known to be toxic to the kidneys and CNS." Jell-O is toxic to the kidneys and CNS in the right concentration. That BTW is what matters, the concentration absorbed into the body, which you are neglecting. Antibiotics are toxic to the body in large does but no one is pushing for them to be pulled off the market. As for studies performed on humans about Thimerosal, while not directly testing thimerosal there were that tested it indirectly. The initial clinical studies for the vaccines that contained the thimerosal to begin with. Look at the FDA website and see for yourself the studies that were performed. I would not drink the Hg that I held in my hand, I was using that example to show that small amounts of Hg in certain forms may not have a long term effect on a human. I would not ingest it because the amount that I had absorbed through my skin would have been significantly lower than the amount absorbed by my digestive tract which would not even come close to the amount of ethyl-Hg found in the standard vaccine regiment given to children in the US. Read up on the differences between ethyl and methyl Hg. Just like table salt bound Hg has different chemical properties than elemental Hg.--TimS 13:35, 8 January 2008 (EST)

I just want to make a quick comment. I consider myself to be a very in-touch person, by I'll admit that the whole vaccine-hysteria aspect of whacky conservative/evangelical/whatevers was completely unknown to me before I got involved with CP and RW. --Edgerunner76 13:40, 8 January 2008 (EST)

And about the mercury thing, we're talking about one-time-only (or very infrequent) vaccines, correct? Wouldn't a good little Catholic who only ate fish EVERY friday get a lot more mercury (in one form or another) than they would from these vaccines? --Edgerunner76 13:45, 8 January 2008 (EST)
I've heard New Agers fret about vaccines, but also about amalgam tooth fillings. Does CP fulminate against that source of mercury as well? If so, I missed it. --67.102.192.7 13:48, 8 January 2008 (EST) (Gulik)
We've had this conversation somewhere else. <snarks>Isn't oxygen toxic in certain circs? Isn't water a bit nasty if the lungs are full of it? etc ... etc ...</snarks> Back in the 50s we threw mercury around as if it was going out of style in s ience classes - maybe that explains me! SusanHelp I'm being haunted by TK 13:52, 8 January 2008 (EST)
<Snark>So that's why you talk the way you do......</Snark> Pinto's5150 Talk 22:32, 8 January 2008 (EST)

We do have a nice little article on thimerosal I would encourage discussion over there. tmtoulouse vex 14:56, 8 January 2008 (EST)

Bunch 'o numbers, don't make me crawl out of bed and intellectually bitch slap you---you will not come out any prettier, trust me...I'm all over this one and you is gonna lose. Oh, visit this too. --PalMD-Mmmm...Brains! 22:28, 8 January 2008 (EST)
Oh do be brief. Just jog on, "doctor". You honestly believe that people should be given a vaccine that contains something of unknown/unproven toxicity when there is no reason beyond cost that an alternative with the preservative removed could be given?? Wow, you were taught by Mengele, right? Wait, aren't you the same crowd that poo-poo'd Andy's comments about the cost vs benefits of mass HPV vaccination?? Oh, I see - it isn't the facts that you are interested in, it's the "politics" of the issue. You will argue till you are blue in the face that 1+1=3, so long as the "opposition" says 1+1=2. — Unsigned, by: 89.241.165.169 / talk / contribs

Tell you what bunch of numbers, provide us with a research article that shows without a doubt the link between autism and thimerosal and we will accept the smack down and shut up. On the other hand we will provide to you the research that says otherwise. Just as a note Pal and I do not receive any kickbacks from big pharma for making these claims. (But if anyone in big pharma wants to provide for a poor researcher such as myself, I will happily accept.) As for cost and storage life, perhaps you do not understand under what limitations the FDA set for vaccine storage. To not have a strong preservative, such as thimerosal, in the vaccines the costs and risks of contamination get significantly higher. Study up on the costs for drug research and development, clinical trial, production, storage and distribution (not to mention money set aside for possible accidents). You will see that in the long run the pharmaceutical industry really is not the extreme money grubbing people you would like to believe. I worked for a company that was basically a repository service provider for a few big pharma clients (FDA certified, cGMP facilities, and lab services for contamination testing) and let me tell you the millions that were spent on our services to ensure quality for less than 50K sq feet of repository space. So my advice to you, my friend, is to research the topic of vaccine, profit and loss of vaccine development, and thimerosal before pushing this anymore. Like Pal said "don't make me crawl out of bed and intellectually bitch slap you" because you will have no chance at a debate unless you know your shit.--TimS 09:26, 9 January 2008 (EST)

BON seems to suggest that

Quit blustering. You were already pwnd, "mr. mercury drinker - oh wait actually its toxic" so shut up, you're my bitch now. You are displaying all the rearguard, we-are-right-because-we-say-we-are bullshit that you constantly snigger about when people at CP do it. Admit it - there have been NO studies which have proved thimerosal is safe. And as for the "boo hoo those poor misunderstand pharmaceutical giants" ... again, see rationalwiki's comments ref HPV vaccine above, and then go drink a nice cup of STFU. 89.241.165.169 13:21, 9 January 2008 (EST)

DUDE! Honest to freakin' God, we get it. You don't want to get your shots. Fine, don't get them. Go get whatever diseases you want. All I ask is that you stay far away from me and anyone else. --Edgerunner76 13:26, 9 January 2008 (EST)

LOL As pointed out above - I'm not anti-immunization, I'm pro-immunization. But that doesn't mean that thimerosal is safe. You obviously drink the koolaid here, "dude". But just as, for example, being pro-Life doesn't mean I endorse or condone violence - real, implied or threatened - against health workers, being pro-vaccine doesn't mean I should sit back on my self-satisfied smug arse like you lot here and say, "Sure, inject people with mercury to improve your profits - only a crazy fundy would object to neurotoxins being pumped into their fragile, months old child. Us rational, enlightened, free thinking libs think its just fine to use this shit without having the first fucking idea what the potential risks are!" Hey - after all, those pharmaceutical companies and self-appointed paragons of intellectual virtue and unerring good judgement ("Trust me - I'm a doctor/scientist") weren't wrong about 2-(2,6-dioxopiperidin-3-yl)-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione... were they? 89.241.165.169 13:48, 9 January 2008 (EST)
This doesn't change anything. Don't get the freakin' shots with thiomersal if you don't want them for you or your family. Just stay the hell away from me. Nothing you wrote changes that. --Edgerunner76 14:02, 9 January 2008 (EST)
Idiot. 89.241.165.169 14:13, 9 January 2008 (EST)
Nice. Did you think that one up all by yourself? --Edgerunner76 14:17, 9 January 2008 (EST)
Pwnd. Go away and play with your toys :) 89.241.165.169 14:18, 9 January 2008 (EST)
Wow, you got me. Seriously, what exactly are you trying to accomplish with all of this? You've made up your mind. Don't get the shots. Either way, why tell us? --Edgerunner76 14:27, 9 January 2008 (EST)


"You were already pwnd, "mr. mercury drinker - oh wait actually its toxic" so shut up, you're my bitch now."

Didn't he write out a lengthy reply and explanation of the different forms of mercury? Didn't you... not reply to that? Bunchanumbers, if that's your idea of "pwning" someone in debate, you could perhaps even argue on a level with Andy! well, maybe not UchihaKATON! 14:32, 9 January 2008 (EST)

Blocked, both of you (no, not Uchiha). Edgerunner: 76*pi seconds, IP type: the sum of the IP numbers in minutes. You are lucky I am not a Sysop and I have no blocking rights... Ed @but not the Poor one! 14:35, 9 January 2008 (EST)

Er, alright then... Anyway, I'd like to draw the attention of any still interested in debating this to the actual Thiomersal page here, as well as the talk page... (DEBATE ON THE LATTER, NOT THE FORMER). UchihaKATON! 14:40, 9 January 2008 (EST)

BON, if you know how to read, please don't forget this link I posted above. It should lead you to all the info you need. You can check out my blog too, but you won't like it. To make it clear, I'm happy to take my bitch slaps if you can present evidence rather than assertions. I'm waiting. ...crickets... User:PalMD

The Lancet study[edit]

I was set off by the phrase "too low to be measured". Now, I've sat on a Mass Spectrometer and taking a reading of cocaine from a £20 note before and my entire postgrad project involves seeing things at obscenely low concentrations so it's difficult for me to accept "too low to be measured". While the abstract of the article does confirm this fact, it doesn't mention the method used to detect the mercury and I don't have a subscription to The Lancet to find out. The article seems fine on this point, however and I imagine that whatever method they used, it was capable of getting down to the right limit of detection. Just curious and trying to be a good ScientistTM, if anyone does have access to The Lancet, could they add that in? Scarlet A.pngd hominem 08:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Merthiolate[edit]

You should mention about the EU and US pandering to the anti vaxxer mercury hysteria by withdrawing Merthiolate and Mercurochrome from the market. Those were safe, effective, over the counter antimicrobial compounds once found in every first aid kit. They also stung like a hornet. We are failing our children by their not experiencing the sting of the dreaded red medicine. Why should I have to mail order it all the way from Thailand now? 148.251.217.202 (talk) 21:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)