Toxicity for fetuses during 2-vaccine 2009/2010 season?

In summary, the article discussed a study claiming an unusual increase in fetal deaths during the 2009-2010 swine flu epidemic, potentially caused by a synergistic toxic effect between two vaccines. However, the author lacks proper credentials and the study has been deemed unreliable due to biased and incomplete data. Additionally, the journal in which the study was published has a low ranking in the field of toxicology. Therefore, the validity of the claims made in the article is questionable and should be approached with caution.
  • #1
nomadreid
Gold Member
1,668
203
TL;DR Summary
An article cited below claims that statistically there seems to be a increased reporting for fetal deaths in the US during the time in which many women received both the swine flu and the seasonal flu vaccines, and suggests, by ruling out some other factors, a synergistic effect between the 2 vaccines. I find the article suspect, but I am neither a biologist nor a statistician. Could there be any validity in this?
The article https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3888271/ claims (if I read it correctly) that there was an unusual increase in fetal deaths reported via the VAERS reporting system (which, it must be said, anybody can report, so the data there has to be taken with a grain of salt-- but the author claims to have taken this into account) in the US during the 2009 to 2010 swine flu epidemic (as compared to the year before and the year after) that the author (an "Independent Computer Scientist") claims suggests a synergistic toxic effect between two vaccines when both taken -- the swine flu epidemic of that year (H1N1) and the seasonal flu vaccine -- since each vaccine alone was tested as safe, and tht the deaths from either flu alone (despite the vaccines) should not have accounted for. In the "Discussion" at the end, the author briefly discusses a possible biological mechanism having to do with the mercury from the Thimerosal used as a preservative in the swine flu vaccine, but I am not in a position to judge the validity of these conjectures. Nor am I sufficiently adept to judge the mass of statistical manipulations contained in the article, or to know whether the author took all confounding factors into account.

(Although this article was published eight years ago, the present mass of misinformation surrounding vaccines has made me flinch when a negative result concerning vaccines surfaces.)

Any input would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
The author has no applicable credentials. From the paper

Acknowledgments
The author thanks Neil Z Miller for invaluable assistance with this manuscript; Paul G King, PhD, for expertise related to Thimerosal-containing influenza vaccines, and also Eileen Dannemann, Director of National Coalition of Organized Women (NCOW), for contributing to the survey data on fetal loss

I would not waste my time. These are not reputable folks IMHO.
 
  • Like
Likes jim mcnamara, DaveE and nomadreid
  • #3
Ah. OK, thanks, hutchphd
 
  • #4
nomadreid said:
I find the article suspect, but I am neither a biologist nor a statistician. Could there be any validity in this?
Me too, on all counts. Did they demonstrate any validity? Not really, IMO.

Yes they have some statistics on their side, but they left as much unexplained as explained. For example, "Table 4. Rate of fetal-loss reports by state": How does his mechanism account for the fact that the states AZ, FL, MN, and MI have fetal loss rates around 0.3, but the states AK, ME, KS, MA, and MT all have loss rates that are above 1.4, a 400% increase? These are not small populations.

Also if their mechanism is Thimerosal, why didn't they study/report on earlier vaccines that also used this compound. It feels pretty biased, but I'll be nice and just say lazy.

nomadreid said:
Although this article was published eight years ago, the present mass of misinformation surrounding vaccines has made me flinch when a negative result concerning vaccines surfaces.
Surfaced, or dredged up. Nobody uses Thimerosal any more. Even if the study is correct, it's irrelevant, except perhaps as medical history.

And the best part: the author (yes one, single author) -
Gary S Goldman, Independent Computer Scientist, Pearblossom, CA

There are better places to get your information about vaccine risks than an "Independent Computer Scientist" in Pearblossom.

OK, next, the journal: Human and Experimental Toxicology (HET). The most recent journal impact factor data I could find was 2018 where it ranked 64th out of 87 journals in the category "Toxicology".

This is a favorite tactic to confuse people with pseudoscience (tobacco, vaccines, flat earth, whatever), publish, or find, a poorly done study so others can cite it, knowing full well that practically no one will actually read it. After all he does have a PhD.
 
  • Like
Likes jim mcnamara, berkeman and nomadreid
  • #5
Thanks, DaveE. This confirms my suspicions.
 

1. What is the potential risk of toxicity for fetuses during the 2-vaccine 2009/2010 season?

The potential risk of toxicity for fetuses during the 2-vaccine 2009/2010 season is low. Extensive studies have been conducted on the safety of vaccines for pregnant women and their fetuses, and the results have shown that the benefits of vaccination far outweigh any potential risks.

2. Can the vaccines administered during the 2009/2010 season cause harm to the developing fetus?

No, the vaccines administered during the 2009/2010 season are not known to cause harm to the developing fetus. In fact, getting vaccinated during pregnancy can protect both the mother and the baby from serious illnesses.

3. Are there any specific ingredients in the 2009/2010 season vaccines that could be harmful to fetuses?

The ingredients in the 2009/2010 season vaccines have been thoroughly studied and are considered safe for pregnant women and their fetuses. Some vaccines may contain trace amounts of mercury, but the type used in vaccines (thimerosal) has not been linked to any negative effects on fetal development.

4. Are there any precautions pregnant women should take when receiving the 2009/2010 season vaccines?

Pregnant women should always consult with their healthcare provider before receiving any vaccines. However, in general, the vaccines administered during the 2009/2010 season are considered safe for pregnant women. It is important to protect both the mother and the developing fetus from preventable diseases.

5. Is there any evidence that the 2009/2010 season vaccines could lead to birth defects or developmental issues in fetuses?

No, there is no evidence to suggest that the 2009/2010 season vaccines could lead to birth defects or developmental issues in fetuses. In fact, getting vaccinated during pregnancy can help protect the baby from certain diseases that could cause developmental issues if contracted during pregnancy.

Back
Top