The Mercola "Facts" poster

OK...there's a huge Mercola article alleging that the H1N1 pandemic is a "massive" illusion (created by, presumably, very large magicians with great big scary magic wands). I'm pondering tackling the entire article, but meanwhile, I think it'd be OK if I took on the "fact" sheet they offer to anyone who'd like to print it and hang it up in their communities. See below each "fact" (there's really only one true--in intent and content--fact on there) and my parsing of it. I'd aver that if this list of 10 "facts" has something squirrelly about it, that lengthy tome accompanying it might have a wee bit o' the rodent about it, too. We could start with their obvious incapacity to understand the definition of "pandemic."

Also...what is up with the creepy alien hand on that "fact" sheet? Is that what getting a vaccine does to you? It makes your hands transparent and boneless?

Anyway...

1. "Fact": Multidose vials of seasonal and injectable H1N1 swine flu vaccines contain MERCURY (all caps theirs), which is a "known neurotoxin."

Inference: Getting a flu shot will poison your brain.

Observations: The actual compound of the preservative in question is called thimerosal. It consists in part (about half) of a kind of mercury called ethylmercury. Millions of doses of the seasonal vaccine are made available that do not have thimerosal. If you're concerned about the multidose formulation, ask about single-dose formulations. Or get the nasal vaccine, which is not made using thimerosal. And "mercury" is not a monolithic term describing any and all forms of mercury. Routes of exposure, chemical composition, and concentrations all play a role in whether or not it will cause harm. Water is a great example. Ingested, it's OK...unless you ingest too much. Inhaled, it'll kill you. Topical exposure is OK...unless you're exposed over a very long term. Oh, and molecular content matters, too. The difference between ethylmercury and methylmercury is a matter of a couple of atoms. No biggie? Well, the difference between H2O (good old water) and D2O (heavy water) is a matter of a neutron...yet heavy water is highly toxic in any number of ways in sufficient concentrations. In biochemical reactions, a small change can make a huge difference.

2. "Fact": Some "swine flu" (quotes mine) vaccines contain formaldehyde and exposure to formaldehyde has been shown to increase the risk of developing certain CANCERS (all caps theirs).

Inference: Getting a flu shot will give you cancer.

Observations: This old chestnut? Still? Formaldehyde is a carcinogen. So is estrogen. Oh, and enjoy this little read about the naturally occurring carcinogens in our diet. Or google "aflatoxins" and then stop eating peanut butter. The issue is, once again, that it's the dose that makes the poison. Oh, and the fact that the body actually makes formaldehyde, too, more than you ever receive in a vaccine. Bottom line: the amount of formaldehyde in vaccines ain't gonna give you cancer any more than that peanut butter sandwich will.

3. "Fact": It is unknown whether or not it is safe to give the "swine flu" vaccine to all pregnant women, children, and adults especially if they are chronically ill or sick at the time of the vaccine.

Inference: Getting a flu shot is a total crapshoot if you're a heartstring-tugging population, and authorities are trying to give them to EVERYONE anyway.

Observations: First of all, look at this list of clinical trials. And then check out the results of this trial. Looks like (a) we've got trials people establishing the safety and (b) we've got trials specific to pregnant women with real numbers and real results, not made-up "facts." This "fact" is also misleading because no one claims that it is safe to give any vaccine to "all" individuals in a given population, and there are clear clinical guidelines for determining who should receive a vaccine and who can have a nasal vs. jab vaccination.

4. "Fact": After the "swine flu" vaccinations of 1976, there was an increased risk of developing Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS).

Inference: Getting an H1N1 shot will give you GBS, too.

Observations: Yes, that's true. But 1976 was 33 years ago, and this vaccine is emphatically not that vaccine. Once again, this "fact" is simply meant to imply an assertion on the part of public health experts that has not actually been made. The "swine flu" vaccination of 1976 is simply not relevant here.

5. "Fact": Guillian-Barre and "brain inflammation" has (sic) been reported after seasonal flu vaccination.

Inference: Getting a flu shot will also give you GBS.

Observations: From the CDC, "In most studies, no association was found, but two studies suggested that approximately 1 additional person out of 1 million people may be at risk for GBS associated with the seasonal influenza vaccine." Two studies of several. One in a million, literally. Better odds than those for being hospitalized or dying from the flu, that. For a great parsing of the relevance of GBS in the context of flu vaccines, read this.

6. H1N1 vaccines have not been evaluated for their ability to cause cancer, impair fertility, or damage genes.

Inference: Getting a flu shot may render you infertile, give you cancer, or "damage your genes."

Observations: This is another misleading statement, meant to imply that someone has totally dropped the ball here in a huge rush or that these are things that vaccines might do to you. Neither of these is the case. The Strategic Advisory Group of Experts to WHO has found that studies in experimental animals (human studies would need to be longitudinal) with all forms of influenza vaccines have found no effects on fertility and no harm to pregnancy or to the fetus. The contents of these vaccines are well tested over decades for their carcinogenic and mutagenic properties at relevant doses. For a review of the relevance of concentration, exposure routes, and timing of exposure, please see 2, above. You don't develop cancer from an acute, very low-dose exposure to any of the ingredients of influenza vaccines and more than you do from eating that peanut butter sandwich.

7. "Fact": It is not known whether the H1N1 vaccine can harm the fetus of a pregnant woman.

Inference: Getting a flu shot will harm your fetus.

Observations: See 5, above, and 3. And remember that what is known is (a) having influenza while pregnant is not a good thing for the mother or the fetus, and (b) this particular influenza preferentially severely affects pregnant women. Mercola argues that these women are also obese or that many are, and that this somehow negates the need for pregnant women to have the vaccine. I'll be walking on that one in another post.

8. "Fact": One manufacturer product insert for the H1N1 vaccine states that immune response was evaluated only in 31 children between the ages of 6-26 months.

Inference: Authorities have tested this shot on only 31 people!

Observations: Obviously intended to scare the hell out of anyone--and I'm still struggling to figure out what their dog is in this hunt (beyond the obvious fact that they have something--books! books! books!--to sell). See above, 3, for the list of clinical trials. For updates on the results of these trials, read here. There is no trial or safety-testing vacuum here.

9. "Fact": The live virus nasal spray H1N1 vaccine is not recommended for pregnant women or for children under age 2 or anyone with a history of asthma.

Inference: Getting a flu shot is so completely dangerous that they don't even want pregnant women or children or asthma sufferers to have one.

Observations: Doh! They were soooo close. Of course, they're still trying to freak people out, so they mention ONLY children, pregnant women, and asthma. The well-disseminated clinical guidelines for this nasal vaccine--which are no different from those for seasonal flu vaccine--are actually more detailed than this and include, in addition to the above heart-string-plucking populations, people 50 or older (so hard to use them for fearmongering), people who are at high risk for complications from flu (e.g., chronic heart or lung conditions, kidney failure, diabetes, immunosuppression), children under age 5 years with a history of wheezing, anyone who's had GBS recently, and anyone who's allergic to chicken eggs. (finally corrected HTML error there. Sorry).

10. "Fact": The H1N1 strain has not been associated with more deaths than previous seasonal flu strains.

Inference: The same number of people are dying from this flu, so why worry? You haven't died from seasonal flu before, now have you?

Observations: It's funny how you can use pregnant women and children to scare people and then avoid mentioning them at all for a different purpose. The fact is, more pregnant women and more children are dying from this flu. More otherwise apparently healthy people. Seasonal flu has a certain predictability about it in terms of whom it kills that makes us complacent even as tens of thousands of people die from it yearly. But H1N1? It defies those predictions and targets healthy groups. That and its potential to go virulent are what have public health experts urging vaccination.

People are free, of course, to read the Mercola "fact" sheet and be manipulated and to try to use it to manipulate others. Or, they're free to get into the messy details and really examine the true facts--facts about biochemistry, about bioavailability, about carcinogenicity, about what words truly mean, about sins of omission and commission, about accuracy in language and in science--and draw conclusions accordingly.

Other links (added as they arise):

• A news release confirming risk to pregnant women (11/3)
• H1N1 expected to cause more deaths in northern winter; 5,712 dead so far worldwide (11/5)
• A mom reconsiders. USA Today (11/6)
• From HuffPo: A question of harm (11/7; thanks to Liz Ditz via Twitter)
• My blog post, copied and pasted in its entirety (don't remember giving permission for that), at Democratic Underground (11/9). Some seem unable to understand the meaning of "sins of omission and commission."
• A WaPo blogger weighs in on the confusion (11/9)
• And so does MSNBC (11/9)
• I can't leave out LBRB's takedown of AoA and the latest on H1N1 in the UK (11/9)
• From the New York Times, quoting Paul Offit (reg. req'd?) (11/9)
• A case representing every parent's fear when vaccinating, including mine. Why do I vaccinate? Because the risks of not doing so far outweigh vaccine-related risks. Whether or not this case of GBS is truly vaccine related has not been established, but with every vaccine, I've watched my kids carefully afterwards for signs of a severe reaction. As any rational person knows, a very few people do have them. (11/11)
• From MSNBC: Flu deaths at 4000, number greater than previously reported (11/12)