Jenny McCarthy—savvy, telegenic, and pulchritudinous—is joining the popular daytime talk show "The View."
McCarthy is a strident proponent of not vaccinating kids, as she believes vaccinations made her son autistic. Now, many scientists and science writers are worried she'll use her new job to spread the word. News of her hire comes less than a week after the end of an outbreak of measles in Wales, precipitated by the low measles vaccination rates there, that sickened more than 1,200 and killed one 25-year-old man.
What if McCarthy's new platform really does bring on a resurgence of unscientific, anti-vaccination beliefs? Here at Popular Science, we wanted to be prepared. We've made a guide for you to help you refute common anti-vaccine questions and claims. Ready, set...
CLAIM: Historically, recommended vaccines have been shown to harm children. Why would today's recommendations be any different?
Yes, some older vaccines had severer side effects than current ones do. I'll look at two examples, polio and pertussis, which is commonly known as whooping cough.
Before 2000, pediatricians in the U.S. routinely gave kids a polio vaccine that contained live, attenuated polio virus. Now, American kids get a vaccine with an "inactivated," or killed, virus. Very rarely, the live virus in the older vaccine could actually revert to its natural state and cause paralysis, a tragic consequence.
Some people in the world still deal with this risk. Live, attenuated polio vaccines are used in some regions where polio is endemic because those who get the live, attenuated vaccine are able to pass on their immunity to others around them, which helps spread immunity more quickly. People are also able to take the live, attenuated vaccine by mouth, instead of in a shot, so it's quicker and easier to get to people in regions where there are few doctors and nurses. Different countries must judge the risks and benefits of the oral polio vaccine differently; even the U.S. had once judged the live, attenuated vaccine worth the risk, when there was nothing better available.
No one has gotten polio from the newer polio vaccine.
Before the 1990s, kids in the U.S. got a pertussis vaccine with severe potential side effects ranging from fever to fainting fits. Some parents sued vaccine manufacturers, claiming that the shot caused brain damage. Scientists have since determined that the parents' claim is unproven. U.S. doctors now use a new pertussis vaccine with milder side effects.
Of course, it's up to everyone to decide individually whether the risks of a medicine outweigh its benefits. Consider the numbers around vaccines, though. Often, something like 1 in 1,000 kids experience moderate side effects such as prolonged crying. For more severe side effects, such as seizures or that rotavirus-caused bowel blockage, the odds go down to one in tens of thousands.
Among children who contract measles, one in 1,000 get encephalitis, an acute brain infection, and one or two in 1,000 die. In 2011, among the 18,000 Americans who got whooping cough that year, more than 1 in 2,000 died, all of them babies.
CLAIM: It is dangerous for little babies to get so many vaccines at one time. The immune system can get overwhelmed.
Babies really do get a lot of vaccines at once. Their first round alone includes six shots. And the list of recommended childhood vaccines has grown in recent decades, as researchers have developed more and more immunizations.
studies have found no link between getting the recommended schedule of vaccines and getting other diseases later in childhood. There's no credible scientific evidence that vaccines are able to "overload" babies' immune systems. Though immature, babies' systems are prepared to handle vaccines. They already handle numerous viruses and bacteria all around them in everyday life.However, numerous
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend vaccines at very young ages because that's when kids are the most vulnerable, as some of the natural immunization they got from breastfeeding fades.
CLAIM: Vaccines have dangerous ingredients in them.
One of McCarthy's--and other vaccine opponents'--most popular claims is that thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative once common in vaccines, causes autism. There's so much evidence showing thimerosal doesn't cause autism.
Nevertheless, thimerosal no longer appears in any vaccines except influenza because an infant receiving the recommended schedule of old vaccines would get a higher-than-recommended dose of mercury, which is toxic in high levels.
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia has more information on the ingredients in vaccines. They are not dangerous.
CLAIM: It's not like a parent's decision not to vaccinate his child harms other kids.
Vaccinated kids generally won't get sick from the preventable diseases that they've been inoculated against. However, if a non-vaccinated kid gets sick with a preventable disease, there are still several people he may infect beyond non-vaccinated classmates.
He may infect babies that haven't yet been scheduled to receive their vaccines. He may also infect the small percentage of kids for whom their immunizations don't work, as immunizations aren't 100 percent effective. The measles vaccine, for example, is more than 95 percent effective—very good, but not perfect.
Where kids aren't vaccinated, more people get sick. In 2011, the states with lenient policies about immunization exemptions had 90 percent more whooping cough cases than stricter states, according to the Institute of Medicine.
CLAIM: There's nothing wrong with spacing out my child's vaccines, if I want to.
Delaying a vaccine just means there's that much longer a window for an unimmunized child to get sick. Limiting the number of doctor's visits children need to get all their shots also helps more families stick to the recommended schedule and reduces the costs of vaccination.
Beyond that, however, there's little evidence about which alternative schedules of vaccinations is best and whether alternative schedules are better or worse than the standard schedule. The standard schedule has been studied because the vast majority of U.S. kids get it, but alternative schedules are pretty new and several different alternatives exist, so they are difficult to study. The Institute of Medicine is trying to figure out whether a study of alternative schedules is feasible.
Some delayed schedules celebrities (and celebrity doctors) have endorsed leave out some vaccinations altogether, which leave kids vulnerable to those diseases.
CLAIM: Every medicine has side effects, and I want to protect my kids.
It's always important to know about side effects before deciding to give your kid a vaccine or another medicine.
Most of the side effects of vaccines are mild compared to the illnesses they prevent. Different vaccines may cause temporary fussiness, swelling, prolonged crying and other effects. Some babies get mild vomiting and diarrhea after the DTaP and rotavirus vaccines. (We fully acknowledge that what doctors call "mild vomiting and diarrhea" is not fun to have to take care of.)
Very rarely, kids may be severely allergic to a vaccine. Allergic reactions generally occur within hours of getting a shot. The reaction may be bad enough that a kid can't get the rest of the shots in that series, which means he or she will have to rely on other kids being vaccinated to protect him from that disease.
1 in 20,000 to 1 in 100,000 babies who get the rotavirus vaccine get a serious bowel blockage for which they have to visit the hospital. Some will need surgery.
This isn't an exhaustive list of the potential side effects of different vaccines, though I've tried to cover the most severe ones. You can find out more from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about Popular Science calling me a crazy. We stopped inoculations for our children after our oldest 2 both suffered from vaccine injuries at their 18mo and 1 year vaccination appointment. My oldest daughter who didn't have asthma prior to her 18mo vaccines suddenly developed asthma. Our youngest daughter (at the time) spent 9 days in the hospital due to dehydration brought on by 16 days of severe diarrhea immediately following her 1 year vaccines. At that point we started doing research and determined that we're done with vaccines for right now. And to be clear, I'm not worried about autism from the vaccines.
I don't believe this article is directed at you. Obviously, if there is an allergy or some other related issue then you can't be vaccinated. My girlfriend stopped breathing when she got the pertussis vaccine as child, so she is still unvaccinated for that. If we have children, they may skip that one too for safety sake. Other than that, it is the only issue I have ever heard of. That is what the the article refers to, that 99.9% will be fine and protected. I'm in the 99.9%, she is in the 0.1%. [Disclaimer: I once contracted mumps while traveling abroad. SinceI was vaccinated, by the time I noticed I had mumps they were beginning to go away. I am totally for vaccines where allergies allow]
I don't feel that calling these activist parents crazies will at all help the situation. What they are calling for are third party unfunded and disconnected from the industry real studies on the long term effects of the additives to these vaccines and dismissing them because someone feels they are nonsensicle is just wrong. All it would take is some hard facts and a large number of tests on these chemicals to prove they are not good or to prove they are fine. Just look at GMO's not all GMO's are the same some have not been tested thoroughly and have been shown by examples to be harmful to the public so those particular GMO's have been denied access in certain economies because of their harmful affects on people and people have risen up about it. The same can be said about certain additives in food. You wouldn't give your children known carcinogens to eat would you? Well then why would you allow them to receive shots containing mercury?
Lets start with a null hypothesis: in this case lets assume vaccines are placebos neither causing harm nor effective. Then look at the evidence to see if the null holds true.
Not all vaccines are safe for everyone all of the time. We have a right to read and know about adverse reactions.
The government asserts that the risks--although potentially drastic--are minimal in probability.
The government also asserts that certain supposed correlations such as autism, and asthma are debunked. However, studies that withhold treatment are considered unethical. Fortunately a control group does exist. There are groups that are isolated and for the most part exempt themselves from vaccinations such as the Amish. There are also surveys and independent self-reporting.
I won't lead the reader here; do your own research.
Often the same studies are cited by both sides:
Vaccine proponents will cite the explanation by the researchers, while the critics will cite just the data. Be sure to read the articles carefully. Always look to see if there is a conflict of interest.
Be sure to take into account exposure to dangerous components, the probability of contracting a specific disease, the effectiveness of a vaccine, and if the side effects outweigh the risks.
Don't be bullied into taking risks you deem unnecessary, and don't assume that all vaccinations have to be rejected as a matter of principle. And last, not all vaccines are created equal. Try a search for politicians who were administered a separate vaccine than the one they suggested for the public.
@Skeptic_Until_Pro - thank you. The article written by popsci is misleading and sad to say the least, but I guess that's what is going to separate people into two main categories. Those who think for themselves and do their own research to make informed decisions and those who are going to read a popsci article and think they've learned all there is to ever know about vaccines. Don't be a noob; do your research and become an informed consumer.
I do not agree with this article at all! They provided no evidence to support their arguments and assume we will take their word for it. That is not science but rather faith. Having a child who consiquencely developed type 1 diabetes shortly after shots, two boys with sever ADHD, I am more aware and knowledgable with my 3 other children. Shots have dangerous additives in them (mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, and MSG). A Harvard study linked aluminum and fluoride to ADHD, Alzheimer's, and dementia. These are brain issues kind of like Autism. I have seen to many videos of parents children before and then shortly after to not think there is a connection. While an immunization maybe good it is the 'other stuff' that isn't. There is no money to be made by a cure! Only in the treatment - why do you think disease is on the rise and higher then any other country? And if you can't realize this then you are a fool! Big pharma and big Corp run our world now - and we are their play things.....
PopSci attests to the validity of the “safe” vaccines program and the publication's own lack of ethic by its language.
Liars and crooks have a patent history of using invective and viciousness to “get their point across”, because they know they are peddling deceit. Strong arming is a commonplace for crooks.
Their “addressing” of issues relating to the “safety” of vaccines equally demonstrates the inherent corruption in “science”.
Careful verbal misrepresentation is a commonplace in many frauds and in selling the “safety” of vaccines. Consider, for example, “some older vaccines had severer side effect than the current ones”. Some. How many? How many newer ones have worse effects? Note the insistence of only discussing polio and pertussis. No article defending vaccines covers any others than these!
And, consider, how many even know about polio vaccine containing the a”attenuated” virus up until 2000 and pertussis vaccines have many severe side effects until the 1980's? Few if any. Because “science” tends to overplay, even fabricate, successes and downplay failures! They won't mention the truth unless they have to. And now, it's just too obvious they aren't coming clean. But what guarantee is there that their “assurances” of vaccines now are any better than the now admitted risky alternatives back then that were peddled as “miracle drugs with no drawbacks”?
As is so often the case, taking issue with accusations of thimerosal causing autism. But no mention of other ingredients. Yes, there is a link to the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia web page addressing individual ingredients “safety”. Yet not once do they ever discuss what combinations of these ingredients cause, or how they might react with compounds to be found elsewhere in the world. And note that the web page on ingredients describes them as “necessary”. Edward Jenner was extraordinarily successful, but he didn't include thimerosal, aluminum or fetal tissue in his vaccines! The drug companies are just looking for ways to charge more.
When suspicion in the fraudulent “war on 'terror'” rises, the New world Order fabricates new “terror” events; if there was a real threat to drug company profits from lack of vaccination, they will create their own epidemic, either from the kind of devices they used to flood the New York subway with largely unnamed gas a couple of weeks ago or chemtrails. The threat, though, is there.
I can only be simple about this argument. The facts are heavily weighed on the side of vaccination. Prior to widespread vaccination, the US population fell prey to numerous diseases that debilitated, disfigured, and outright killed many people who could have been saved with vaccines.
This link has data (change the , after www):
If you listen to the pundits and the conspiracy theorists, they will have you believe in a past where people were healthier, smarter, and lived longer lives due to no vaccinations, plentiful preservative-free fresh foods, and healthier lifestyles. Go hunt up mortality rates for the US from 100 years ago. Comparatively, our ancestor's lives were "nasty, brutish and short." We live in a time in which obesity is considered an epidemic, our country may go bankrupt because of all the old, retired people on the government dole, and the greatest maladies we face are ones people used to never live long enough to get, such as cancer and Alzheimer's.
Please, stop thinking there is a giant conspiracy to control you or something. Things are better now than they have ever been. Just keep in mind that there are very few choices in life that do not come without some kind of risk. Vaccines are good for you and your children and are worth the risk.
This Chart shows exactly why you should vaccinate. If you want more proof please go visit a country that has or recently had endemic Polio.
Also the article did not call you crazy but if you are overly sensitive to people calling you that and it happens a lot maybe you need to take a deeper look at yourself.
@Barksley - I agree that vaccines are a lifesaver and if we didn't have them, infant mortality rates would be much higher than they are. I would never say that we need to do away with vaccines and I believe that the majority of people, even the ones who won't get them for their kids, will agree that we're better off as a whole with them. But when my very young girls each had an issue related to their vaccines, you start to wonder if they should keep getting them.
@johnt - I never knew anyone who had a bad reaction to a vaccine until my 2 oldest children had vaccine injuries. The one with the severe diarrhea has no lasting effects (other than a healthy fear of hospitals and doctors offices due to her stay) but my oldest one is on daily medications to control her asthma and allergies. My children are in the 0.1% as well.
Quoting sources and studies that are bias and funded by vaccine companies will not change anybody's opinion
This piece of propaganda is laughable.
IMO the pharmaceutical companies are using a classic misdirection. The people I have heard and the data I have seen is not against vaccines but against the use of mercury as a preservative (thimerosal) to extend the shelf life of vaccines and save money. The systems of autism and the systems of mad hatters disease are the exact same. Go look it up. Just like with peanut allergies some children react to the increased mercury in their bloodstream and develop mad hatters or autism. This is about money. Not health. The pharmaceutical companies need a safer preservative than thirmerosal but that would cost money to develop. This reminds me of the argument about acne and chocolate. Chocolate companies have proven there is no link to acne and chocolate. But it isn't the chocolate that causes the acne. it's the paraffin they put in the chocolate to make it shine and look pretty that causes the acne.
wow symptoms got auto-corrected to systems. nice PS.
I find most they arguments to be utter BS, the majority of Pro vaccine websites are run by the drug companies. Finding impartial data is very hard. However, over the years of research I have done, I have found a greater link to basic hygiene and sanitation than there are to vaccines.
crikey. Vaccines cause adhd/autism/etc just as much as going to middle school causes puberty.
Seriously, this coincidence of timing has been the only "link", but people who needed something to blame latched onto it and now diseases that hadn't been a problem for decades are cropping up again.
I don't believe there is such a thing as a "live" virus. They do not have any of the attributes of living things. The terms should probably be active and deactivated. As to the conclusion that vaccines cause more harm than good, the statistical data is absent from the article and commentary to draw that conclusion. There is an argument that we use too many vaccines and inhibit the natural development of antibody production by the immune system. The complexity of the issue makes relevant comment difficult.
This is a foolish article that ignores a lot of science, you quote studies but I will bet the farm you do not know who did all the studies you quote or who paid for them. Safe levels of mercury!!!!give me a break there is NO safe level of mercury let alone for an infant. If vaccines were so safe why are there laws to protect the vaccine manufacturers from legal action when they do damage. Popular science should do a lot more research not just listen to the drug and pharmaceutical industry.This makes this fine magazine nothing more than a mouthpiece for big pharma. Kerri Rivera in Mexico probably has the highest success rate in curing autism and associated brain conditions and the process is clean water, clean food, oxygen, and cleansing the body of toxins. Do an article on this wonderful lady she is in Puerto Vallarta. Posted by CACL Canadian Anti Corruption League.
I was planning on not renewing my subscription this year, and I've been getting it for years, due to the fact that I've noticed a change in the type articles they've been writing. In fact, I mentioned just the other day to my son that I was getting the feeling that PopSci was just another arm of DARPA considering all the military tech they feature.... then they come out with this article? Vaccine Crazy's? Is that what they call parents that are skeptical of whats going on these days? You'd have to be a fool to trust the govt and the pharmaceutical industry with all the light thats been shining on their dark sides recently. Thanks PopSci for making my decision to cancel that much easier.
This is about the fourth separate article I've read calling Miss McCarthy a "crazy" recently, there have been countless others in the past. For the record, there have been proven known issues with vaccines in the past. There are still baby-boomers floating around, that nobody who knows the situation denies were damaged by vaccines. Seems there's been testimony in front of congress about "Salk polio vaccine released for public use between 1955 and 1963 was contaminated with SV40; and SV40 has been proven to cause cancer in animals."
Okay that's just old news, fair enough, let's pretend everything is "safe" now. Then explain;
"Vaccine Court Awards Millions to Two Children With Autism" Posted: 01/14/2013 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html
Yeah, that's rather recent, factual, and disturbing.
Now while we're calling people "crazies" we might just want to put things in perspective. And who is tasked with raising a child damaged by vaccines.....?
Their parents. So to sit back and expect parents to subject their children to this and hope they're in the majority of vaccine recipients who have no ill effects....?
It's a load of crap, I, and many other people aren't having children to be pharmaceutical guinea pigs. And to be honest, all this "hacking" the immune system with vaccines and such, is most likely just making the immune system weaker over generations. Where did a "gluten" allergy come from? Where did peanut allergies come from? And quite a few other conditions or allergies that weren't just discovered because the science advanced.
Don't worry though, I won't be sending my un vaccinated "feral" children to your state ran institutionalized learning facilities to possibly contaminate your pharmaceutical guinea pig state owned children.
This is why I didn't renew. To political, and poor writing. No matter what side of the fence you are on, how is this article professional? I should pick up a copy of US Weekly.
e.a.greenhalgh Popsci is guilty of BAD science/reporting and perhaps helping to harm the public with this article. I must point out the new concern with COUNTERFEIT science articles . Most specifically the GSK paxil case wherein they used a ghostwriter to say the drug was safe . Teens died because of the BAD science . We need GOOD vaccines , but we don't need the harm of bad science . Would Popsci give ALL children peanut butter ? No, because some are allergic .Same with vaccines .We have just understood GB Syndrome , but AFTER harm occurred. Same with modern vaccines . As more children have survived , similarly we have a broader genome with sensitivities .The INDUSTRY does NOT test adjuvants for sensitivities .There have been NO modern studies on them and how they interact with the genome . So we may have a bigger pool of children sensitive to various adjuvants ,which many are put in just to lower the production costs not a true safety concern. There are NEW studies showing new genome responses to many agents triggering reactions like autism .So, for parents to TRUST vaccines NEW studies are needed. Indeed , parents may have to get their own genome mapped in order to know what is safe for them or not . I have dealt with the federal government , and they with hold documents to protect the industry ,so they get kick backs, and a document I have asked for proves the research at the U of Waterloo was officially listed as so bad as to be feces. Fact. And I need this doc for felony charges and human rights violations to go forward. Do we need good vaccines .Absolutely, but Popsci has done everyone a big disservice , and could have dug much deeper into a complex and deadly issue.
I am the oldest of 9. I am the only child in my family who received infant vaccinations. I am the only child in my family with food allergies. I am allergic to most raw fruits and vegetables, most beans and all tree nuts. I know this is merely anecdotal evidence, but I still wish I had never received infant vaccinations.
It boggles my mind that people still argue about vaccines... just for a better part of last century, literally millions of kids around the world caught and died from entirely preventable diseases like smallpox, measles, and whooping cough.
And by not getting vaccinated, you aren't just putting your child at risk. All the other children who aren't vaccinated also are at additional risk because you as a parent made a stupid decision. The society as a whole is in danger of losing herd immunity because of uninformed parents.
And study, after study, after study, have shown absolutely NO connection between MMR vaccine and autism, and side effects of vaccines are already well understood and those at risk are told prior to immunization. And if you want to put vaccinations in terms of risk management, it's not even close!
And on top of this, vaccines have become much more efficient and reliable just in the past 30 years. For example, the immune-load of current vaccines (even though this "overloading" of immune system from vaccines is a complete myth, correctly stated in the article) is 10% to that of vaccines from the 70's which protected against smaller number of diseases.
There is complete scientific consensus on the efficacy and benefits of vaccines, and while I can't deny the well intention of anti-vaccination people, they are doing a terrible, terrible, harm to the society by spreading ridiculous information. Thanks Pop-sci for taking a stand and for this article.
Labeling any segment of your readership "crazies" is a sure way to bring down their wrath, I couldn't resist.
Personally, I harbor no strong opinions one way or another regarding vaccinations. In the US, most cases of any serious vaccinated disease are so rare, I'm more inclined to see us start weaning our bodies away from the need to be "protected" from our environment. How else is our body going to adapt in the next few hundred, thousand years of microbial invasion?
My wife on the other hand, not-so-much. Do I call her "crazy" for being concerned for my kids well-being, hell no. The simple fact your arrogance and insensitivity to the "facts" and experiences of others only fuels their resolve and diminishes your argument.
I would recommend a more neutral approach in your next article, if I decide to read it.
The basic law of the universe is EVERYTHING EFFECTS EVERYTHING. Therefore, if popsci talked negative of vaccines, they would lose big pharma funding.
This is how all the corporate "news" works.
Using the rule everything effects everything, it also turns out vaccines cause autism.
corporate news depends on $, not truth
If you don't mind gambling with your child's health, forget the vaccinations. I grew up in an era when most kids were not vaccinated, and,oddly enough, those of us who didn't get vaccinated suffered through the illnesses mentioned above - and some didn't do all that well.
It's your call! By living with a conspiracy theory mindset you only hurt yourself.
Wow... Reading these comments is just sad. When people who actually read a magazine dealing with science are taken in by this hoax to this extent then that really shows just how far it has spread. It really makes you lose faith in the future of humanity.
I keep hearing people saying "do your own research". The problem is that people who "do their own research" apparently are not familiar with logical fallacies or for that matter with how to evaluate evidence. There is about as much consensus in the scientific medical community about the safety and efficiency of vaccines as there is in the physics community for the validity of the theory of relativity. There is no controversy. If you give in to logical fallacies or if your research consists of going on the internet with no ability to tell which sites are actually backing up their claims with real scientific evidence then "doing your own research" means absolutely nothing.
The entire anti-vaccine hoax is based on fear among parents who genuinely want the best for their kids, a failure to realize that anecdotal evidence is not evidence and a failure to understand the post hoc ergo prompter hoc logical fallacy.
A real outbreak of polio or smallpox or something that will actually kill your face would probably have all of these sitting at home self proclaimed biology experts who without any real education speculate that "hey I think personally that vaccines probably messes with our immune system and makes us have allergies" to run for the nearest actual doctor. So you don't like being called crazy, probably because you get called that a lot based on this belief. How about considering that maybe you ought to double check your "research" then. "The first time someone calls you a horse you punch him on the nose, the second time someone calls you a horse you call him a jerk but the third time someone calls you a horse, well then perhaps it's time to go shopping for a saddle."
Just for the sake of accuracy, vaccines don't prevent illness or disease. They are generally homeopathic in operation. It is the immune system of the individual that does the work of protection. Give that whatever spin your heart desires, but recognize that human bodies are the active agent of healthcare.
If my immune system can't mount a defense against an invader, it matters little whether my body has been previously introduced to that pathogen.
I think most of the readers here realize that this is a poorly written article that is biased in nature and contrary to the name of the publication offering very little in the way of 'scientific' analysis. It also shouldn't surprise the readers that a national publication would take the 'popular' view on the vaccination debate. Pop Sci's approach of blind obedience towards the greater good leaves behind many glaring issues that the general public should know. The fact that By Nov. 30, 2009, the mercury-based preservative thimerosal, had only been phased out of most vaccines, shows that the medical field is retracting their mistakes as of only 4 years ago. There is much more to the vaccine debate, and not in an all-in or all-out manner, then this article lets on. Shame on you Pop Sci for treading so lightly on such a heavy issue.
There was a problem, however, with using these monkey kidney cells to both create the original vaccine strains and grow the vaccine in large quantities. Monkeys contain simian viruses. When the poliovirus was passaged through the monkeys or grown on the monkey kidney cells for production, extraneous viruses became part of the final poliovirus vaccine. As early as 1953, Dr. Herald R. Cox, a scientist working at Lederle Laboratories, one of the polio vaccine manufacturers, published an article in a peer reviewed scientific journal in which he stated, “[P]oliomyelitis virus has so far been cultivated only in the tissues of certain susceptible species—namely, monkey or human tissues. Here again we would always be confronted with the potential danger of picking up other contaminating viruses or other microbic agents infectious for man.” In fact, in 1958, a scientific journal reported that “the rate of isolation of new simian viruses (from monkey kidney cells) has continued unabated.” Additionally, in 1960, the pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. wrote to the U.S. Surgeon Genera
Ronald Patrick Marriott "Mantle Man" antimatter