I don't know enough to say categorically if it's a good or bad thing, I'm actively curious about vaccines - when something is so sacred that you dare not question it, I get curious.
Some things I learned the other day in skimming the literature that make me more curious.
- The primary method used to create peanut allergies in rats to study them is to inject an aluminum adjuvant while exposing the rat to peanut protein. Makes me wonder if it might be possible to accidentally induce an allergy in a human by injecting aluminum adjuvant at they same time they are exposed to a potential allergen.
- A significant number (every single one I've seen so far) of vaccine safety studies use a "reactogenic placebo", which can mean anything from a mild reactogen like propylene glycol which was in the placebos for some of the covid vaccine trials, to using the entire vaccine solution (in some cases 20+ ingredients) minus the active vaccine ingredient, to using an existing previously-approved vaccine as the "placebo". I see the logic that to find out how well your active vaccine ingredient works you'd want to compare to someone injected with the same solution minus that ingredient. But for a real long term safety study of the entire vaccine, it seems to me you'd want a third arm that compares with an inert / saline placebo. Here is a paper discussing this: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.3233/JRS-230032
ChatGPT has been helpful for finding papers that talk about specific stuff; it can be hard to find anything on normal search engines.
I want to see long term safety studies showing that injecting [vaccines with] aluminum adjuvants compared with an inert placebo has no significant effects over a long time period. These studies may well exist but I have not found them. Anyone have suggestions for how? ChatGPT has failed me on this one.
Aluminum-containing adjuvants have been used for more than 70 years in billions of doses of vaccines, and have an excellent safety record (Butler et al., 1969; Edelman, 1980; Jefferson et al., 2004).
"""
So I looked into each of those papers:
Butler et al., 1969; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5774314/
Study in 168 children, comparing aluminum-containing vaccine vs vaccine without aluminum, only looking at immediate reaction-- nurse checked on child the day after injection, no long term monitoring. They found the vaccine with aluminum caused fewer immediate reactions and was therefore less toxic.
Edelman, 1980; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6997966/
From the abstract "To date, the question of adjuvant safety has not been resolved and represents the major obstacle to the orderly development of adjuvanted vaccines"
Jefferson et al., 2004 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14871632/
This one is a review of studies that compare aluminum-containing vaccines with other vaccinces or smaller amounts of aluminum. No aluminum vs inert placebo.
So, nothing there along the lines of a long term randomized placebo controlled trial to monitor the impacts of injecting aluminum adjuvants.
> Makes me wonder if it might be possible to accidentally induce an allergy in a human by injecting aluminum adjuvant at they same time they are exposed to a potential allergen.
IANAMD. I think it's just how the vaccine works. You want to be "allergic" to the melease virus, so your body overreacts and kill all of them before you get ill. But not toooo allergic as getting a anaphylaxis and die on the spot when you see someone with melease. So I guess it's another case of the dose makes the poison and regulating the amount of viral parts, aluminium and the number of injections you can get to the sweet spot were the vaccine has better overall effects.
Exactly. The question I wonder about is how many other allergies are accidentally caused by this. May be extremely rare, but I have no idea and haven't found any good studies of the topic.
IANAMD^2 Probably the dose of peanuts and aluminium is higher to cause the allergies in rats. It would very interesting in something that is researching vaccines can give an official reply here.
I don't know enough to say categorically if it's a good or bad thing, I'm actively curious about vaccines - when something is so sacred that you dare not question it, I get curious.
Some things I learned the other day in skimming the literature that make me more curious.
- The primary method used to create peanut allergies in rats to study them is to inject an aluminum adjuvant while exposing the rat to peanut protein. Makes me wonder if it might be possible to accidentally induce an allergy in a human by injecting aluminum adjuvant at they same time they are exposed to a potential allergen.
- A significant number (every single one I've seen so far) of vaccine safety studies use a "reactogenic placebo", which can mean anything from a mild reactogen like propylene glycol which was in the placebos for some of the covid vaccine trials, to using the entire vaccine solution (in some cases 20+ ingredients) minus the active vaccine ingredient, to using an existing previously-approved vaccine as the "placebo". I see the logic that to find out how well your active vaccine ingredient works you'd want to compare to someone injected with the same solution minus that ingredient. But for a real long term safety study of the entire vaccine, it seems to me you'd want a third arm that compares with an inert / saline placebo. Here is a paper discussing this: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.3233/JRS-230032
ChatGPT has been helpful for finding papers that talk about specific stuff; it can be hard to find anything on normal search engines.
I want to see long term safety studies showing that injecting [vaccines with] aluminum adjuvants compared with an inert placebo has no significant effects over a long time period. These studies may well exist but I have not found them. Anyone have suggestions for how? ChatGPT has failed me on this one.
To be specific on what I've found so far.
This is the most widely cited paper to demonstrate safety of aluminum adjuvants. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10....
Quote from the paper
""" Safety of Aluminum-Containing Adjuvants
Aluminum-containing adjuvants have been used for more than 70 years in billions of doses of vaccines, and have an excellent safety record (Butler et al., 1969; Edelman, 1980; Jefferson et al., 2004). """
So I looked into each of those papers:
Butler et al., 1969; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5774314/ Study in 168 children, comparing aluminum-containing vaccine vs vaccine without aluminum, only looking at immediate reaction-- nurse checked on child the day after injection, no long term monitoring. They found the vaccine with aluminum caused fewer immediate reactions and was therefore less toxic.
Edelman, 1980; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6997966/ From the abstract "To date, the question of adjuvant safety has not been resolved and represents the major obstacle to the orderly development of adjuvanted vaccines"
Jefferson et al., 2004 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14871632/ This one is a review of studies that compare aluminum-containing vaccines with other vaccinces or smaller amounts of aluminum. No aluminum vs inert placebo.
So, nothing there along the lines of a long term randomized placebo controlled trial to monitor the impacts of injecting aluminum adjuvants.
> Makes me wonder if it might be possible to accidentally induce an allergy in a human by injecting aluminum adjuvant at they same time they are exposed to a potential allergen.
IANAMD. I think it's just how the vaccine works. You want to be "allergic" to the melease virus, so your body overreacts and kill all of them before you get ill. But not toooo allergic as getting a anaphylaxis and die on the spot when you see someone with melease. So I guess it's another case of the dose makes the poison and regulating the amount of viral parts, aluminium and the number of injections you can get to the sweet spot were the vaccine has better overall effects.
Exactly. The question I wonder about is how many other allergies are accidentally caused by this. May be extremely rare, but I have no idea and haven't found any good studies of the topic.
IANAMD^2 Probably the dose of peanuts and aluminium is higher to cause the allergies in rats. It would very interesting in something that is researching vaccines can give an official reply here.
The “here is why that is a good thing actually” headline is already a meme, inadvertently popularized by outlets like the NYT.
https://thetexashorn.com/2022/04/11/journalists-stop-saying-...
Does the NYT lack the self awareness that nobody who is concerned about vaccines trusts the NYT?
kinda looks like they are trolling,right!
https://archive.is/OpGbB