If you mean thimerosal, it was used as a preservative but is avoided now purely due to PR considerations. If you mean something else, you'll have to give us the vaccine it's in, the specific compound and information on how much is in a dose before we can have any kind of informed discussion on the topic.
It really matters what compound you have something in. Sodium explodes in water, while chlorine is a poisonous gas. Together they make NaCl, or table salt, which is necessary for life. Even though it's necessary, it still has an LD50--too much salt will kill you, though you would find it very hard to accidentally consume such a quantity without something like salt pills.
Thimerosal is still in vaccines, specifically flu vaccines (1/3 to 1/2 of them) and some others. We give these vaccines to infants and pregnant women so it's very, very important to know that it's safe.
For instance, the Afluria Quadrivalent vaccine for 2019-2020 has 24.5 mcg of Thimerosal in 0.5 mL. We give .25 mL to infants as young as 6 months so they are getting 12.25 mcg in a single dose.
While Thimerosal is 50% ethly mercury by weight, the safe effective dose for methyl mercury (a different form) according to the EPA is 0.1 mcg/kg/day. So an 12 lb infant could get ~0.02 mcg and be safe.
However a 2012 study found that ethyl mercury is over 50x more dangerous than methyl mercury. For the sake of argument let's assume that's not true and they are equally safe. Kids would still be getting 600x the safe daily dose! Then figure that they're getting multiple vaccines a day, month, year.
Of course that study contravenes a lot of data reported by the CDC/Pediatric Association/Whomever. They have still recommended phasing out Thimerosal from vaccines because of the potential links with debilitating developmental abnormalities, and we have. But it's still in some of the shots we give tiny kids.
And you have to consider that other vaccine ingredients like aluminum salts and polysorbate-80 can pass the blood-brain barrier and take ethyl mercury with them. There's never been a study done on the long-term affects of multiple doses of multiple combined adjuvants in infants as far as I know. THAT'S what I want to see before I expose my children to this stuff.
This gives a good explanation of thimerosal, explains that it's declined significantly in usage, and cites studies showing it's safe.
That said, you shouldn't be censored, you should be allowed to question this and get explanations for particular concerns, and you shouldn't be forced to vaccinate against your will. We should peacefully convince people that vaccination is for their own good and that the particular vaccinations are safe and effective and get herd immunity that way, rather than by force.
I honestly feel that the propagandists trying to polarize us by saying, effectively, "force them to vaccinate or you all die" are actually trying to get people to stop vaccinating, identify with the other political party, and then use that as a way to scape-goat you all as a danger to society as part of their political machinations. I believe that a peaceful, voluntary arrangement is the only way that people can rightfully trust the government and trust is absolutely necessary for something like this to be truly effective.
Because they probably put it there for a good reason. I don't know how vaccines are made exactly, so it would be retarded for me to look at the list of "ingredients" and have opinions about it. Same goes for you.
Why did the supreme court legally classify vaccines as "unavoidably unsafe". Why can't vaccine manufacturers be held liable for any damage caused by their product?
The answer to your first question is that they didn't.
Here's the full quote (from Justice Scalia):
the Act expressly eliminates liability for a vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects: “No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings
In other words, if the warnings about the side effects are properly given, the vaccine manufacturer should not be held liable for those side effects. Seems pretty reasonable, doesn't it? We all know vaccines and medication have side effects. You can't sue the company that produced your medication for a side effect it listed.
And........? What's bad about it? Why do they want an excuse to put mercury in our bodies? Go on, spell it out.
If you mean thimerosal, it was used as a preservative but is avoided now purely due to PR considerations. If you mean something else, you'll have to give us the vaccine it's in, the specific compound and information on how much is in a dose before we can have any kind of informed discussion on the topic.
It really matters what compound you have something in. Sodium explodes in water, while chlorine is a poisonous gas. Together they make NaCl, or table salt, which is necessary for life. Even though it's necessary, it still has an LD50--too much salt will kill you, though you would find it very hard to accidentally consume such a quantity without something like salt pills.
Thimerosal is still in vaccines, specifically flu vaccines (1/3 to 1/2 of them) and some others. We give these vaccines to infants and pregnant women so it's very, very important to know that it's safe.
For instance, the Afluria Quadrivalent vaccine for 2019-2020 has 24.5 mcg of Thimerosal in 0.5 mL. We give .25 mL to infants as young as 6 months so they are getting 12.25 mcg in a single dose.
While Thimerosal is 50% ethly mercury by weight, the safe effective dose for methyl mercury (a different form) according to the EPA is 0.1 mcg/kg/day. So an 12 lb infant could get ~0.02 mcg and be safe.
However a 2012 study found that ethyl mercury is over 50x more dangerous than methyl mercury. For the sake of argument let's assume that's not true and they are equally safe. Kids would still be getting 600x the safe daily dose! Then figure that they're getting multiple vaccines a day, month, year.
Of course that study contravenes a lot of data reported by the CDC/Pediatric Association/Whomever. They have still recommended phasing out Thimerosal from vaccines because of the potential links with debilitating developmental abnormalities, and we have. But it's still in some of the shots we give tiny kids.
And you have to consider that other vaccine ingredients like aluminum salts and polysorbate-80 can pass the blood-brain barrier and take ethyl mercury with them. There's never been a study done on the long-term affects of multiple doses of multiple combined adjuvants in infants as far as I know. THAT'S what I want to see before I expose my children to this stuff.
Yeah, there's plenty available from the FDA about many of those concerns here:
https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availability-biologics/thimerosal-and-vaccines
This gives a good explanation of thimerosal, explains that it's declined significantly in usage, and cites studies showing it's safe.
That said, you shouldn't be censored, you should be allowed to question this and get explanations for particular concerns, and you shouldn't be forced to vaccinate against your will. We should peacefully convince people that vaccination is for their own good and that the particular vaccinations are safe and effective and get herd immunity that way, rather than by force.
I honestly feel that the propagandists trying to polarize us by saying, effectively, "force them to vaccinate or you all die" are actually trying to get people to stop vaccinating, identify with the other political party, and then use that as a way to scape-goat you all as a danger to society as part of their political machinations. I believe that a peaceful, voluntary arrangement is the only way that people can rightfully trust the government and trust is absolutely necessary for something like this to be truly effective.
I don't know. It's probably easy to find out. Why assume it's bad?
Because they probably put it there for a good reason. I don't know how vaccines are made exactly, so it would be retarded for me to look at the list of "ingredients" and have opinions about it. Same goes for you.
Why did the supreme court legally classify vaccines as "unavoidably unsafe". Why can't vaccine manufacturers be held liable for any damage caused by their product?
The answer to your first question is that they didn't.
Here's the full quote (from Justice Scalia):
In other words, if the warnings about the side effects are properly given, the vaccine manufacturer should not be held liable for those side effects. Seems pretty reasonable, doesn't it? We all know vaccines and medication have side effects. You can't sue the company that produced your medication for a side effect it listed.