Is there antifreeze in vaccines or not?
Myths About Vaccines," author David Gorski MD accuses anti-vaccinationists
of outright lying about toxins in vaccines. He especially ridicules them for
being "chemistry-challenged" on assertions regarding one particular toxin:
Here’s one example. The aforementioned Jenny McCarthy has been repeating
that there is “antifreeze” in vaccines, as she did in the interview linked
to earlier. That line is straight off of a
websites. (Amazingly Mr. Heckenlively managed to restrain himself from
repeating “the “antifreeze in vaccines” gambit. I can only hope that it is
due to intellectual honesty, although I can’t rule out the possibility that
he just didn’t know about it.) One
website in particular links to an MSDS about
Quaker State Antifreeze/Coolant, the principal ingredients of which are
ethylene glycol and diethylene glycol. Guess what? There’s
no ethylene or diethylene glycol in vaccines.
Not so fast, Dr. Gorski. There IS ethylene glycol in vaccines. It's called
2-Phenoxyethanol, and is
found in childhood vaccines Infanrix, Deptacel, Pediarix, and Ipol, amongst
others. You see, the other name for 2-Phenosyethanol is ETHYLENE GLYCOL
MSDS on car antifreeze, the regular ethylene glycol, says that the lethal
oral dose to kill 50% of rats is 4700 mg/kg. The
MSDS on 2-Phenoxyethanol, the vaccine ethylene glycol, says the lethal oral
dose to kill 50% of rats is 1260 mg/kg. Comparing apples to apples, the vaccine
ethylene glycol is a lot more toxic than car antifreeze--to rats anyway.
The debate shouldn't be on whether ethylene glycol exists in vaccines. It does,
period. The debate should be on whether this
type of ethylene glycol and this amount
of ethylene glycol can cause the same adverse reactions as those normally
associated with car antifreeze.
It is a situation where both sides are bending and polarizing the truth to suit
their own agendas, while parents looking for honest, straightforward, objective
information are screwed. Is antifreeze in vaccines? Not exactly--not the kind we
put in our cars. Aha, then antifreeze is NOT in vaccines? Not exactly--a type of
ethylene glycol that is known to have similar (actually higher) levels of
toxicity to car antifreeze is found in very small amounts in a number of
So word to the wise, parents. Do your own research. How do you sort it out, when
both sides are liberal with the truth-bending?
1. Look for precision. Science is precise. It is not whether A is true or not
true. Science defines A carefully, and then qualifies under what conditions A is
true and not true. Anyone who gives you a simple "fact" is bending the truth,
because reality is not simple.
2. Look for references. Someone says there is antifreeze in vaccines? What makes
them say that? Someone says it is NOT in vaccines? Where all have they looked?
Follow their research trail for arriving at that conclusion. (In this case, if
they had looked under the right chemical names, they would have found it.)
3. Look for objectivity. Read the original research papers. Outline the
"plot"--what did they do in the study? Now to tease out confirmation bias, blind
yourself to the results. Switch the research findings so that the results come
out the opposite of what you would like to believe. If the study finds no
autism-vaccine connection, much to your relief, then pretend it did. If the
study finds a strong autism-vaccine connection, as you knew it would, pretend it
didn't find anything at all. Once the results are disagreeable, the flaws in the
research design and methodology come leaping out like magic.
4. Trust no one but yourself. If you let other people do the thinking for you,
then you'll just end up with other people's thoughts--and prejudices, and
agendas. It's kind of obvious, but it needs to be said. This is what this blog
is all about: think for yourself.
For further research:
Vaccine excipient table sorted by vaccine.