RFK Jr.'s latest on thimerosal
"But newly released documents show that behind the scenes CDC was quietly discouraging Thimerosal's removal. In a July 1999 letter, vaccine producer SmithKline Beecham tells CDC that it is ready to produce non-Thimerosal DTP (Diptheria/Tetanus/Pertussis) vaccines immediately and has sufficient inventories to supply the entire U.S. market during the remainder of 1999 and the first half of 2000, by which time other vaccine manufacturers would have their Thimerosal-free DTP vaccines on line.While the thimerosal/autism stories have generally faded from the media spotlight (except for a few places, such as Imus, etc.), RFK Jr.'s post and many of the comments that follow it illustrate how strong the passions remain among those certain that a link exists and that the government and vaccine industry covered it up for financial gain.Thimerosal-laden DTP vaccines containing 25 micrograms of mercury apiece were then being administered to American infants at two months, four months and six months -- far exceeding EPA's recommended safe level for mercury. Had CDC accepted SmithKline's offer, it could have immediately reduced the mercury exposures to vaccinated six-month-old children by 40%.
However, in November, CDC mysteriously sent a letter back rejecting SmithKline's offer. Then, on July 14, 2000 CDC published a deceptive press release promising to require that all vaccines be Thimerosal-free as soon as "adequate supplies are available." This was a full 12 months after the agency had denied SmithKline's proposal.
"If CDC were basing its decision on safety alone, it would have taken SmithKline up on its offer. That's a no-brainer," said a federal health official who requested anonymity. "So there were other considerations beside safety that were guiding their decision making."
Among these "other considerations" were CDC's important concerns for the preservation of the vaccine program, a bureaucratic impulse for self-preservation, and protecting the economic interests of its vaccine industry friends."
There's little use reviewing here the arguments of both sides in this debate. What all could probably agree on is that the CDC decision to remove thimerosal in 2000 sent a mixed signal, since the evidence then (and now) cited by the medical community continues to show zero evidence of a link to autism. 'If the evidence is so clear, why call for its removal?' is a reasonable question to ask. What seemingly was an attempt to end the controversy by removing a non-essential ingredient has actually had the reverse effect, increasing skepticism and thoughts of conspiracy among those inclined to think in such a way. Years later, the controversy continues to simmer in many, as RFK Jr.'s comments illustrate.
Labels: Autism, Thimerosal








