False claims about mercury in vaccines aired on Joe Rogan's podcast
The clip, which also circulated on Facebook, comes from a March 26 episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience" in which Rogan promoted Humphries's debunked 2013 book "Dissolving Illusions" (archived here). The YouTube video of the interview received more than 2.2 million views.
Image
Screenshot of an Instagram post taken May 8, 2025
Vaccine ingredients are regularly targeted by activists who claim, without evidence, that they are dangerous or linked to neurological disorders such as autism.
Humphries's statement about mercury is also false.
"It is absolutely made up that there is any danger with a spill from a vaccine," said pediatrician Michelle Fiscus, the chief medical officer at the Association of Immunization Managers (archived here). "Typically what you do is clean it up with a piece of paper towel."
The safety data sheet from GlaxoSmithKline, the British manufacturer of the influenza vaccine that includes thimerosal to prevent bacterial and fungal contamination, says those handling the product can wipe small spills with an absorbent material (archived here).
Different kinds of mercury
Humphries further misleads by claiming that a mercury containing vaccine would be given to a child. The US Food and Drug Administration says all the shots recommended for children under the age of six are available in formulations that exclude the ingredient (archived here).
Mercury is a neurotoxin and can be harmful after it reaches a certain level in the body (archived here).
There are different types of mercury, however, and thimerosal is a form called ethylmercury (archived here). Ethylmercury "is very easily broken down by the body," Fiscus said.
Health officials are concerned with poisoning from another form, methylmercury -- though almost all people have some level of exposure, typically from eating fish. (archived here).
The World Health Organization's Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety has studied mercury as a preservative and consistently reached the same conclusion: "There is no evidence to suggest that the amount of thiomersal (thimerosal) used in vaccines poses a health risk" (archived here).
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other global health authorities approve its use as safe (archived here and here).
The CDC says the most common side effect of thimerosal is "redness and swelling at the injection site" (archived here). As with any ingredient in a medical product, in rare cases the recipient may have a serious allergic reaction (archived here).
Despite the ingredient's approved use, thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines in the United States in 2001 (archived here). This was in part to reduce the exposure levels of premature infants with low birth weights and benefit babies and young children in places where total exposure to mercury from environmental sources is more difficult to eliminate (archived here).
Since then, studies have found that immunization with thimerosal-containing vaccines during infancy does not decrease neuropsychological performance later in childhood (archived here and here). Additionally, a review of studies found "no association between thimerosal exposure and autism" (archived here).
More of AFP's reporting on vaccine misinformation is available here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Local France
a day ago
- Local France
French left urges Macron to act over US plan to destroy contraceptives
A State Department spokesperson told AFP this week that "a preliminary decision was made to destroy certain" birth control products from "terminated Biden-era USAID contracts." The US Agency for International Development, the country's foreign aid arm, was dismantled by Donald Trump's administration when he returned to office in January, replacing former president Joe Biden. Under the plan, some $9.7 million worth of implant and IUD contraceptives stored in Belgium are reportedly set to be incinerated in France. An open letter signed by French Green leader Marine Tondelier and several female lawmakers called the US decision "an affront to the fundamental principles of solidarity, public health and sexual and reproductive rights that France is committed to defending." In the letter, they urged the French president "not to be complicit, even indirectly, in retrograde policies," saying women's contraception products such as IUDs and implants were intended for "low- and middle-income countries." "Cutting aid for contraception is shameful, destroying products that have already been manufactured and financed is even more mind-boggling," Tondelier told AFP. The Greens urged Macron to request the suspension of the plan "as part of a joint initiative with the European Commission." They also called on him to back humanitarian organisations that say they are ready to redistribute the contraception products. Separately, Mathilde Panot, parliamentary leader of the hard left France Unbowed (LFI) party, also urged Macron and Prime Minister Francois Bayrou to take action. "You have a responsibility to act to prevent this destruction, which will cost lives," she said on X. Advertisement "These resources are vital, particularly for the 218 million women who do not have access to contraceptive care." The US plan has sparked outrage from global health NGOs, with Doctors Without Borders denouncing the "callous waste." "It is unconscionable to think of these health products being burned when the demand for them globally is so great," said Rachel Milkovich of the medical charity's US office. The State Department spokesperson said the destruction will cost $167,000 and "no HIV medications or condoms are being destroyed." Doctors Without Borders says that other organisations have offered to cover the shipping and distribution costs of the supplies, but the US government declined to sign off. US lawmakers have approved slashing some $9 billion in aid primarily destined for foreign countries.
AFP
3 days ago
- AFP
Misinformation about abortion safety spreads via US podcast
"Does having an abortion increase a woman's risk for getting breast cancer?" asks health influencer Bethany Cameron in a video clipped from her podcast and shared to her 1.5 million Instagram followers July 10, 2025. "Yes," says Seth Gruber, founder of The White Rose Resistance, a US advocacy group he describes as a "pro-life ministry." Image Screenshot of an Instagram post taken July 14, 2025 The exchange comes from a longer conversation on the July 9 episode of Cameron's "Digest This" podcast. The episode aired as legal and legislative battles over abortion play out across the United States following the Supreme Court decision to overturn the federal protection for the right to the procedure in 2022. It also comes as misinformation about the safety of abortion, which has been shown to influence public perception and policy making, continues to spread (archived here and here). Findings from leading health organizations show Gruber's comments about the risks associated with abortion are inaccurate. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Committee on Gynecologic Practice says there is "no causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk" (archived here). Breast cancer risk According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), several factors (archived here) contribute to innate greater risk of breast cancer. They include age, inherited genetic mutations, family history of breast or ovarian cancer, breast tissue density and whether the person started menstruation prior to the age of 12. Other variables a person can impact, such as their activity level, weight and consumption of alcohol. Reproductive history also plays a role. The National Cancer Institute says on its website: "Women who have their first full-term pregnancy at an early age have a decreased risk of developing breast cancer later in life" (archived here). The number of births makes a difference, with more children linked to a lower risk (archived here). Breastfeeding for a year or more is also associated with decreased risk (archived here and here). Some studies in the mid-1990s suggested induced abortion was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (archived here). However, ACOG and the American Cancer Society say the studies had important design limitations. "Higher-quality studies have generally found no link between abortions and breast cancer risk," the American Cancer Society's website says (archived here). Jo Freudenheim, professor at the University at Buffalo School of Public Health, explained two kinds of studies commonly used to examine the relationship between abortion and breast cancer to AFP in a July 15 email (archived here). Case control studies, which compare women with a new cancer diagnosis to those with no cancer history, may suffer from "recall bias," she said. Those recently diagnosed "will be thinking about their health history in a different way" and may recall more events than healthy women. Cohort studies have participants fill out questionnaires about their reproductive histories and then follow them to see who gets breast cancer, eliminating this bias. But in cohort studies, Freudenheim said follow-ups are essential to producing reliable results. In both study designs, confounding factors such as age at first pregnancy must be considered to see if the association is truly related to abortion. A study published in 2020 analyzed the combined results of six cohort studies and eight case-control studies and concluded that abortion is not associated with breast cancer risk in women who have never given birth to a child (archived here). Over the past 15 years, medication abortions have increased steadily in the United States (archived here), drawing attention to the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol which are used in the procedure. But Katharine O'Connell White, chief of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston Medical Center (archived here), and A Mariquit Rosete Lu, an obstetrics and gynecology specialist (archived here), told AFP: "There is no evidence that either drug leads to a higher risk of breast cancer." "In fact, mifepristone's anti-progesterone effect has been explored as a potential therapy for patients with progesterone-sensitive breast cancer," they said in a July 24 email. A comprehensive review from the National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) also said abortions were not found to increase the risk of breast cancer (archived here). Maternal mortality In the video with Cameron, Gruber also asserts that having an abortion is far more dangerous that giving birth. Experts AFP talked to and the NASEM's 2018 report show that childbirth is more dangerous than elective abortion (archived here and here). The United States is one of the more dangerous advanced-economy countries to give birth, with Black Americans dying at a rate three times higher than white people (archived here). The World Health Organization defines a maternal death as "deaths from any cause related to or aggravated by pregnancy or its management (excluding accidental or incidental causes) during pregnancy and childbirth or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and site of the pregnancy" (archived here). Following this definition, the CDC reported the 2022 maternal mortality rate was 22.3 deaths per 100,000 live births (archived here). By contrast, the mortality rate from legal, induced abortion for the same year was 0.8 deaths per 100,000 abortions (archived here). A separate long-term analysis of mortality rates from 1998 to 2005 concluded: "The risk of death associated with childbirth is approximately 14 times higher than that with abortion" (archived here). This statistic is disputed by groups that oppose abortion, who argue death certificates fail to document if the procedure led to a death by suicide or alcohol abuse. But White and Lu pointed to a five-year longitudinal study which compared outcomes for women who had abortions to those denied the procedure. It found no significantly higher risk of suicidal ideation, mental health problems or substance abuse in the abortion group (archived here). ACOG has also raised concerns about restrictions on abortion, saying on its website that where the procedure is illegal or highly restricted, women often resort to unsafe means (archived here). "Today, approximately 21 million women around the world obtain unsafe, illegal abortions each year, and complications from these unsafe procedures account for approximately 13 percent of all maternal deaths, nearly 50,000 annually," the organization says. More of AFP's reporting on false and misleading claims about abortion is available here.
LeMonde
3 days ago
- LeMonde
From Facebook games to a llama reminding you to drink water: The rise of 'streaks,' the rewards that keep you hooked
You are just one glass of water short of your daily hydration goal, and that evening, your phone pings: "Almost there! Just 4 oz left today." Once you've finished your last glass of water, you have to log it onto the Waterllama app or risk losing your streak – that is, the sequence of consecutive days when you reached your target. Apple Fitness, Duolingo, Snapchat, BeReal, Kindle and WeReward: The list of apps that track our streaks is growing, all aiming to bring us back every day – and to make us feel guilty if we miss a day. So when did we start placing so much importance on this constant stream of tiny rewards? The streak draws on two key ideas: reward daily engagement and punish irregularity. These were popularized by free-to-play games that spread across Facebook starting in 2007, funded by microtransactions, data resale and advertising. "The longer they keep you coming back, the more valuable data you provide to the developers," explained Julien Pillot, who holds a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Nice and specializes in video games. Winning over occasional users is thus crucial. Developers find inspiration from video game scoring systems that reward speed or the number of "kills," or when you find secret areas – features that "artificially maximize a game's lifespan," according to Pillot. They adapt this strategy to instantly hook new players: "The simplest and most effective way to get people to return regularly is to reward them just for logging in," Pillot said.
