"The Conversation" Misleads on Aluminum in Vaccines and Promotes Stolen Valor

Sanitation (hygiene) and nutrition deserve the bulk of the credit for the reduction in severe disease and deaths, not vaccines.

Jul 27, 2024

This article from The Conversation offers a narrowly prescribed overview of vaccine benefits and safety, attempting to counter information often provided by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. However, the article has several shortcomings that need to be addressed for a more balanced and scientifically accurate representation.

The article attempts to underscore the alleged historical success of vaccines, emphasizing the significant reduction in infectious diseases and the number of lives saved. This contextual background is crucial for understanding the actual relevance of vaccines in public health. Citing specific data points, such as the 154 million lives saved over the past 50 years, reinforces the apparent effectiveness of vaccines.

However, it is now well known that such claims represent a type of stolen valor. Let’s see what Gary Null had to say about this in 2020:

“What has contributed historically to the decline of scourges like smallpox, polio, tetanus, measles, and diphtheria? Although many attribute the decreased incidence of these diseases to the introduction of vaccines, a look at the epidemiological data indicates that many, if not most, infectious diseases started declining noticeably prior to the introduction of their vaccines due to significant improvements in the way we live. Sanitation, proper sewage disposal, clean water, improved nutrition, indoor plumbing, less-crowded living conditions, elimination of child labor and better hygiene were the real reasons that infectious rates waned.

For example, polio declined in the US in the 1920s from 7,229 cases in 1921 to 3,826 cases in 1951. By the time the vaccine became widespread in 1961, the number of cases was already down to 1,076. (8) There is no scientifically sound evidence that mass inoculation can be credited with eliminating any infectious disease. Furthermore, if vaccination is responsible for the disappearance of these diseases in the US, why did they simultaneously disappear in Europe prior to mass vaccinations?

The following graphs show that large drops in disease death rates occurred long before vaccines were introduced. From 1900 to 1963, when the measles vaccine was introduced, death rates from measles had declined from 13.3 per 100,000 to 0.2 per 100,000 – a 98% decrease. From 1900 to 1949, death rates from whooping cough declined from 12.2 per 100,000 to 0.5 per 100,000 – a 96% decrease. From 1900 to 1949, death rates from diphtheria declined from 40.3 per 100,000 to 0.4 per 100,000 – a 99% decrease. These graphs demonstrate clear and major changes in the severity of diseases well before any vaccines were introduced. (9)

Figure 1. Death rates from Measles

Figure 2. Death rates from Diphtheria

Figure 3. Death rates from Pertussis

The data suggest that public health interventions, such measures as improved hygiene, infected being being isolated are more effective and less expensive interventions to contain epidemics of respiratory viruses, with estimates of effect ranging from 55% to 91%. (10) Although strong evidence supports good hygiene as a central factor of disease prevention, the press rarely recommends measures people can adopt to best protect themselves against viral or bacterial disease, aside from vaccination.”

The CDC acknowledged that the significant declines in mortality and serious diseases in the United States over the 20th century were largely due to improvements in sanitation, better nutrition, and overall living conditions, along with advances in medical treatments and vaccines. This recognition is documented in their reports on public health achievements.

A relevant source is the CDC's report "Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999: Control of Infectious Diseases," which emphasizes that public health measures such as improved sanitation, cleaner water, and better food safety practices played crucial roles in reducing the incidence of many infectious diseases. In 1999, the CDC pointed out that hygiene, nutrition, and vaccines deserving credit. However, the evidence of a major effect even on par with hygiene and nutrition is lacking. In fact, the improvements in these areas were foundational to the decline in mortality rates and occurred well before the widespread use of vaccines.

The journal Pediatrics published a study titled "Annual Summary of Vital Statistics: Trends in the Health of Americans During the 20th Century," which reported that nearly 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among US children occurred before 1940 when few antibiotics or vaccines were available. The study highlights that improvements in water treatment, food safety, organized solid waste disposal, and public education about hygienic practices were major contributors to the decline in mortality.

In addition to the CDC reports, several other studies and publications have been published that discuss the role of sanitation, nutrition, and overall living conditions in the decline of mortality rates rather than attributing it solely to vaccines:

Dr. Edward H. Kass's Speech (1970):

In his 1970 speech to the Infectious Diseases Society of America, Dr. Kass highlighted the importance of understanding the actual factors behind the decline in mortality rates. He stressed that improvements in living conditions were major contributors, and vaccines were latecomers to the trends. Read more here.

McKinlay & McKinlay (1977):

The study titled "The Questionable Contribution of Medical Measures to the Decline of Mortality in the United States in the Twentieth Century," published in The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, found that vaccines and other medical interventions were responsible for only a tiny fraction (1-3.5%) of the decline in mortality rates from 1900 to 1970. This study is a seminal work in the field and provides comprehensive data on the impact of various public health measures.

"Annual Summary of Vital Statistics: Trends in the Health of Americans During the 20th Century" (2000)

This study, published in the journal Pediatrics, confirmed that nearly 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among US children occurred before 1940, highlighting the importance of improved sanitation, food safety, and hygienic practices. They did not even mention vaccines in their abstract.

Dissolving Illusions by Suzanne Humphries:

This book explores the historical context and data regarding the decline in infectious diseases, attributing much of the decline to improvements in public health measures rather than vaccines alone. See Dr. Suzanne Humphris’ book, Dissolving Illusions for more graphs and citations and analysis.

In fact, it may be worse than better. In "The Introduction of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis and Oral Polio Vaccine Among Young Infants in an Urban African Community: A Natural Experiment", published in EBioMedicine, a study by Peter Aaby et al. (2017) examined the non-specific effects of vaccines in African children, finding that certain vaccines may have serious unintended adverse effects in settings with poor living conditions including increased mortality from all causes.

The Conversation’s article's claim that "aluminum is eliminated from the body within days" is an oversimplification. Research, including studies by Lyons-Weiler et al. (2020), has shown that aluminum can persist in the body, particularly in the brain and bones, for much more extended periods, potentially leading to neurotoxic effects (McFarland et al., 2020). A more nuanced discussion of aluminum's pharmacodynamics is necessary. While most aluminum per dose is cleared from the bloodstream within a few days, around 40% lingers in a long clearance tail for many weeks; research indicates that a portion can be retained in tissues, especially the brain, potentially contributing to neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity as the accumulation occurs from multiple injections over short periods of time on the CDC’s recommended childhood vaccine schedule.

Figure from our study published in 2020 comparing various vaccine schedules Note the clearance rate is insufficient in the CDC schedule to allow infants to ever go below the per-body-weight toxic level. The Excel file that performs these calculations was published by the journal so anyone can estimate clearance and accumulation dynamics from any proposed schedule.

The Conversation article largely dismisses potential vaccine risks so as to minimize the readers’ perception and comprehension of the scope of the problem. Adverse reactions do, in fact, occur - and they can destroy peoples’ lives. The article also neglects to report that aluminum hydroxide - the same compound used in vaccines - is used to reliably and routinely induce autoimmunity in mice and rats. A balanced approach would recognize these risks.

On the question of vaccines and autism, the article fails to acknowledge the broader context of scientific investigation, including studies exploring the central role of aluminum as an environmental exposure, the state of knowledge of the impact of mercury and aluminum on chronic microglial activation mediated by the IL-6 proinflammatory cytokine. See the IPAK ASD Model for a more comprehensive resource. The well-known cover-up of the associations repeatedly found between vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism, is, of course, not found in this narrative-enforcing article.

The article also misleads on the consequences of serious adverse events in the legal setting. The claim that vaccine manufacturers are liable for injury or death is misleading without full context. While claimants can technically sue manufacturers after a VICP petition is denied, legal and financial barriers make it a rare occurrence (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2020). The VICP provides a mechanism for compensation but has limitations, including legal and financial barriers, that make it difficult for claimants to sue manufacturers after a petition is denied. (See our course taught by Wayne Rohde on vaccine compensation programs in the US).

The article downplays the role of nutrition and sanitation in disease prevention, focusing solely on vaccines. It is essential to recognize the significant roles that nutrition, sanitation, and other public health measures play in reducing disease incidence. To the public, this seems consistent with the denialism that has been so rampant about COVID-19 vaccine injury. To attribute the reduction in serious illness and mortality from childhood illnesses to vaccines is a form of stolen valor.

In sum, the article from The Conversation ignores current comprehension of aluminum pharmacokinetics and clearance dynamics and fails to acknowledge established vaccine risks. It is not forthright about the complete history of vaccine/autism research, is obtuse to the point of obfuscation about the legal aspects of vaccine liability, and ignores all evidence of sanitation and better nutrition reducing severe disease and death from mild childhood illnesses. It is neither a balanced article nor a scientifically accurate representation of the issues surrounding vaccination.

What do you think? Leave a comment and share this article for maximum impact.

Popular Rationalism

Discussion about this post