faetal on 18/2/2015 at 08:12
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
What on earth are you talking about? I'm not sure what problem you are referring to. The only thing I mentioned was that people don't trust that the manufacturing processes are safe and your comments don't have much to do with that.
How on earth would a toixic additive cause disease resurgence? The resurgence would result either from people avoiding the vaccines or a vaccine in question not being effective....not from other additives in the vaccine?
I'm being polite as I can here, but you need to understand that reality is NOT equivalent to perception....and the current perception is that pharma companies and regulatory agencies (particularly the FDA) are completely untrustworthy. If you ask me they've got nobody to blame but themselves for that.
Sorry, I should have been more clear - diseases which were all but eradicated are coming back because people are eschewing vaccination. I'm saying this recent resurgence in people not getting themselves and their kids vaccinated is not linked to Big Pharma making vaccines or using additives because this has always been the case. The nucleation event for people beginning to ditch vaccines was the Andrew Wakefield "The MMR vaccine causes autism" paper. Since this paper was published by The Lancet and the media caused it to explode, vaccination compliance has been on the decrease and the diseases are coming back. Measles and Whooping cough are now back to being viable factors in child mortality again. I am sure that since the Wakefield paper and Wakefield himself were totally discredited, the anti-vaxxer movement has had to broaden its reasoning (we come back to cognitive dissonance again - if you'de devoted a lot of energy to being anti-something, it takes a great deal of psychological strain to do a U-turn even when faced with strong evidence) to a more generic "we don't trust big pharma" stance (though amusingly, big pharma also own most of the alternative and homoeopathic remedy manufacture and sales too, so they get their money either way the coin lands).
There were controversies with thiomersal and aluminium additives way back in the '60s and '70s too, but they didn't have anywhere near the impact of Wakefield and then goons like Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey using their celeb status and their son's autism to propagate bunk. I've heard all kinds of ridiculous tin-hat stuff about vaccines being used to control the populace (same type of people who think water fluoridation is being used to turn us all into cretins with brittle bones), but this wave of distrust towards vaccines is what has spread from the powder keg of the Wakefield controversy.
DDL on 18/2/2015 at 15:55
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
Their positions is based in a distrust of the pharmaceutical companies: they believe that the pharma companies are willing to put ingredients in the vaccines that they know are harmful in order to make a quick buck by taking advantage of consumer ignorance.
You might need to explain this one for me. Are you suggesting that they think big pharma is deliberately putting poison in their vaccines because..."poisoning children is profitable, somehow"? Or because they have a surplus of poison and can't work out how to dispose of it ("In CHILDREN! Of course, it's so
simple!"), or...what?
I don't see how, even if you feel that adjuvants are somehow poisonous (rather than more or less essential for generating a good immune response), adding adjuvants is
more profitable than not doing so.
"If we include more ingredients, we make more money because..reasons!".
faetal on 18/2/2015 at 17:54
Well the word adjuvant is scientific and thus scary by default. Also, thiomersal "contains" mercury, which is toxic. These same people also avoid using salt in meals because of the risk of inhaling toxic gas or being burnt by an unstable metal catching fire.
Tony_Tarantula on 19/2/2015 at 06:58
Nope.
What I'm suggesting is that the emergence of the "anti vax" movement and the growing popularity of organic foods(to include the increasing preference for unprocessed food) both have the same root cause. People think that companies are willing to put hazardous ingredients into their products if it's cheaper to do that than use a safe alternative or more expensive processing method.
DDL, I'm not quite sure how you got at the conclusion you did as it doesn't logically follow from anything anyone said. It seems like you're just parroting what other people say that internet conspiracy theorists say.
An example of what I'm talking about is High Fructose Corn Syrup: we're pretty damn sure that it's awful for your body, but we keep using it anyway because it costs a lot less to sweeten a food product with it than with real sugar.
Tony_Tarantula on 19/2/2015 at 06:59
Quote Posted by faetal
These same people also avoid using salt in meals because of the risk of inhaling toxic gas or being burnt by an unstable metal catching fire.
Has that actually happened or are you just making that up as a strawman?
DDL on 19/2/2015 at 08:47
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
An example of what I'm talking about is High Fructose Corn Syrup: we're pretty damn sure that it's awful for your body, but we keep using it anyway because it costs a lot less to sweeten a food product with it than with real sugar.
What do you define as "real sugar", here? Because I'm not sure you're as informed as you think you are, scientifically or metabolically.
faetal on 19/2/2015 at 09:12
Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula
Has that actually happened or are you just making that up as a strawman?
Just that people freaking out about the mercury in thiomersal don't understand chemistry - a fear of the mercury in thiomersal is as logical as a fear of the explosive hydrogen in water or the sodium and chlorine of table salt.
Also, you still aren't explaining why this wave of vaccine fear happened to kick in right about the time that one researcher falsified a load of research saying that the MMR causes autism. I'm not saying that this one paper is the root reasoning for the entire anti-vax movement, I'm saying it was the match which lit the powder keg. I've already mentioned how previous controversies re vaccine additives had no such effect on the rate of vaccination. Saying NOPE, doesn't really allay that or add to the conversation. You're being over-confident because you are over-estimating your own knowledge - see my previous post re the Dunning-Kruger effect.
People who are conflating vaccines with processed food are kind of being wilfully ignorant also. These idiots who are deciding what to put into their bodies aren't harming anyone by buying only organic labelled food (and there are reasons why this labelling rarely amounts to more than just a way for retailers for charge more for certain foods, but that's a separate subject), but they are actively increasing the number of people who die every year from preventable disease by deciding that vaccines aren't "natural" enough for them. I'm sorry, but if someone is willing to trade vague and baseless paranoia about vaccines for real, severe and often fatal disease, then that person is an idiot.
Tony_Tarantula on 19/2/2015 at 16:55
Quote Posted by DDL
What do you define as "real sugar", here? Because I'm not sure you're as informed as you think you are, scientifically or metabolically.
Common white sugar.
(
http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/edible-innovations/sugar2.htm)
Quote:
One misconception about HFCS stems from its name. In fact, HFCS isn't that much different than standard, processed white sugar. A commonly used form of HFCS contains 45 percent glucose and 55 percent fructose [source: Warner]. White sugar is split 50-50 between glucose and fructose. HFCS is higher in fructose than conventional corn syrup, which is 100 percent glucose. But other types of HFCS, especially those used in non-soda products like certain breads, are 58 percent glucose and only 42 percent fructose
It's still only one example of many. Subway Inc. was using a known carcinogen in it's bread.
Numerous other U.S. food companies use ingredients that are banned in other first world countries. For example Pizza hut(along with a couple other chains) uses a chemical called Azodicarbonamide which the U.K. recognizes as a contributor to Asthma and food allergies. MSG is commonly snuck into American packaged food despite it's known side effects. A lot of American soft drinks use Brominated Vegetable Oil, which is banned in the European Union.
Again, the American corporate sphere's habit of using ingredients which are known or suspected of having adverse health effects in order to save a few bucks is well documented. There's going to be some overlap here but that's inevitable when I'm posting lists:
(
http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/Food/11-foods-banned-us/story?id=19457237#11) 11 ingredients banned outside the US
(
http://www.shape.com/blogs/shape-your-life/13-banned-foods-still-allowed-us) 13 banned foods still allowed in the US
Disclaimer: below link is posted by an awareness-raising campaign
(
http://foodbabe.com/2013/02/12/how-food-companies-exploit-americans-with-ingredients-banned-in-other-countries/) How food companies exploit Americans with ingredients banned in other countries.
From a cosmetics site:
(
http://www.totalbeauty.com/content/gallery/dangerous-ingredients-in-cosmetics) Cosmetics ingredients allowed in the US but banned in other countries
There's literally hundreds of examples in the US where the FDA has approved the use of substances either known or suspected to be harmful to humans, which are banned in Europe. (
http://ensia.com/features/banned-in-europe-safe-in-the-u-s/)
It's not even a recent problem, but a structural one decades old.If you only click on one link, click on that one. It's the most comprehensive one posted.
A few key takeaways from that link:
Quote:
While FDA approval is required for food additives,
the agency relies on studies performed by the companies seeking approval of chemicals they manufacture or want to use in making determinations about food additive safety, Natural Resources Defense Council senior scientist Maricel Maffini and NRDC senior attorney Tom Neltner note in their April 2014 report, Generally Recognized as Secret.
“No other developed country that we know of has a similar system in which companies can decide the safety of chemicals put directly into food,” says Maffini.
Quote:
In many cases, when it comes to eliminating toxic chemicals from U.S. consumer products, manufacturers’ and retailers’ own policies — often driven by consumer demand or by regulations outside the U.S. or at the state and local level — are moving faster than U.S. federal policy.
Quote:
Also, you still aren't explaining why this wave of vaccine fear happened to kick in right about the time that one researcher falsified a load of research saying that the MMR causes autism
Why is there a burden of proof on me to argue a point I've never contested?
That said, you are asking about something that just didn't happen. The original study occurred in 1998 and I didn't notice any significant amount of anti vaccine sentiment until about 2011-2012.....over a decade after that study was performed.
Tony_Tarantula on 19/2/2015 at 17:02
Quote Posted by faetal
People who are conflating vaccines with processed food are kind of being wilfully ignorant also. These idiots who are deciding what to put into their bodies aren't harming anyone by buying only organic labelled food (and there are reasons why this labelling rarely amounts to more than just a way for retailers for charge more for certain foods, but that's a separate subject), but they are actively increasing the number of people who die every year from preventable disease by deciding that vaccines aren't "natural" enough for them. I'm sorry, but if someone is willing to trade vague and baseless paranoia about vaccines for real, severe and often fatal disease, then that person is an idiot.
Do you know what would be nice? A little bit of honesty and consistency from policymakers.
it seems like they're more outraged at people doubting them then they are at the actual health risk.
Bring thousands of un-vaccinated immigrants into the United States without doing a proper medical screening?(which, incidentally, was the real cause of the measles outbreak in the US)Inline Image:
http://sr.photos3.fotosearch.com/bthumb/CSP/CSP214/k2143395.jpgAllow people from countries stricken with Ebola(a deadly disease with no vaccine) to travel freely through the U.S. and Europe?Inline Image:
http://sr.photos3.fotosearch.com/bthumb/CSP/CSP214/k2143395.jpg Lie about Ebola, claiming you can't spread it via aeresol fluids((http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/02/19/limited-airborne-transmission-of-ebola-is-likely-new-study-says/) when you can), and ensuring that if it did spread thousands more would catch the disease than if they had people take proper precautions?Inline Image:
http://sr.photos3.fotosearch.com/bthumb/CSP/CSP214/k2143395.jpg A small % of people (between 1 and 2 % in most US states) don't get the MMR vaccine?Inline Image:
http://cdn.alltheragefaces.com/img/faces/svg/angry-must-resist.svgLast time I checked both of the first two actively facilitate the spread of "real, severe, and often fatal diseases" and contribute more directly than a single digit percentage of "anti vaxxers"(quite a few of whom are vaccinated themselves) ever will.
DDL on 19/2/2015 at 17:27
So, "we totally know high fructose corn syrup is bad for us, but it's cheaper than REAL sugar", becomes "HFCS is 55:45 fructose:glucose, while 'real sugar' is 50:50". Also, fructose is actually marginally sweeter than sucrose, so you can generally add less for the same sweetness.
In other words, I could get more fructose by just drinking a single extra sip of special "NON-HFCS COKE" than I could by drinking a regular amount of HFCS coke. Because sucrose (plain white sugar) is made of a fructose and a glucose stuck together.
Also, there's this:
(
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23493540)
And a ton of other studies (wander round pubmed: it's useful).
In essence, the health risks are from "too much refined sugar", and as a secondary consequence, "too many calories". both of which are conclusions I feel the evidence supports. High fructose corn syrup is just another ridiculous health-scare fad. Just stop eating so damn much, basically.
