
Is Thimerosal in Flu Shots Safe? Experts Discuss CDC Vaccine Decision
A CDC advisory panel voted 5–1 to recommend only flu vaccines without the preservative thimerosal.
Thimerosal is a mercury-containing compound used as a preservative in vaccines and other drugs.
Doctors and physician advocacy groups warn that the decision could lead to more confusion and vaccine hesitancy.
A CDC advisory committee voted 5-1 on Thursday to recommend only single-dose formulations of flu shots that do not contain the preservative thimerosal.
The vote follows a shakeup of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), in which Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. dismissed all 17 members of the panel and hand-picked their replacements.
The ouster and subsequent ACIP vote have caused alarm among doctors and physician advocacy organizations—including the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) — who claim the committee is stoking confusion and distrust in vaccines.
'It further undermines vaccine confidence. And they're doing this despite a massive amount of data that confirms that thimerosal is a safe and effective preservative,' said Jake Scott, MD, clinical associate professor of infectious diseases at Stanford Medicine.
Thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative, has been used since the 1930s in vaccines and other drugs. Since the 1990s, it has been the target of intense speculation and debate due to claims — now debunked — that linked it to autism and neurotoxicity.
ACIP's new recommendations contradict numerous studies and decades' worth of data showing no link between thimerosal and autism or other neurological conditions.
'This decision does not appear to be data-driven at all,' said Saahir Khan, MD, PhD, an infectious disease specialist with Keck Medicine of USC.
'This will sow a lot of distrust and probably lead to reduced vaccine uptake rates because they are sending a message that indirectly says that we don't think vaccines with thimerosal are safe, whereas the evidence shows that they are safe,' Khan said.
What is thimerosal?
Thimerosal, which contains about 50% mercury by weight, is one of the most widely used preservatives in vaccines.
Every time a drug vial is pierced, it is susceptible to bacterial and fungal contamination. Thimerosal prevents microbial growth and contamination.
Today, the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines has declined due to the advent of single-dose vaccine formulations.
All routinely recommended vaccines for U.S. children ages 6 and younger are available in formulations without thimerosal. The vast majority of flu shots administered last flu season, about 96%, were also free of thimerosal.
ACIP's recommendation this week against thimerosal-containing flu shots applies only to vaccines packaged in multi-dose vials. While multi-dose vials make up only a small subset of flu shots, the format is important for public health.
'Multi-dose vials are cheaper, easier to deploy, and essential for equitable access. They're especially important during pandemics. They proved to be essential during the H1N1 pandemic when single-dose supplies run out a lot faster,' said Scott.
Following a review in 1999, conducted as part of the FDA Modernization Act (FDAMA), the FDA, National Institutes of Health (NIH), CDC, and others recommended that thimerosal be removed from childhood vaccines as a precautionary measure. That recommendation was based on 'scientific uncertainty' at the time and sought to reduce total mercury exposure in infants.
That review found ' no evidence of harm ' caused by thimerosal in vaccines beyond localized reactions. However, it noted that some infants' cumulative mercury exposure in their first six months exceeded EPA recommendations, and that removing thimerosal could reduce this overall exposure.
At vaccine concentrations, thimerosal delivers roughly 25 micrograms of mercury per 0.5 mL dose — about the same amount found in a three-ounce can of tuna.
However, there's also an important distinction between the mercury found in thimerosal and tuna. Certain kinds of fish contain methylmercury, which can be toxic.
Thimerosal contains ethylmercury, which, in contrast, is eliminated far more rapidly from the body and thus is far less likely to persist and cause harm.
Revisiting the thimerosal controversy
In the lead-up to this week's vote, Lyn Redwood, a retired nurse practitioner and president emeritus of Children's Health Defense — a group formerly chaired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose mission is 'ending childhood health epidemics by eliminating toxic exposures' — reiterated many claims against thimerosal in an ACIP presentation.
However, those claims — especially the alleged link between thimerosal and neurotoxicity — have been extensively debunked.
'There have been multiple well-controlled studies, randomized meta-analyses, and trials comparing vaccines with thimerosal to vaccines without thimerosal to see if there was any difference in neurological outcomes, and these trials generally did not find any connection between thimerosal at the doses used in vaccines and neurological conditions,' said Khan.
An often-cited Danish study that included over half a million children found no causal relationship between thimerosal and the development of autism. Another large study of more than 100,000 children in the United Kingdom also found no evidence to support a link between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders.
A 2010 study found that exposure to thimerosal in prenatal or infant stages did not increase the risk for autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
Perhaps most telling, Scott points out, is that even after thimerosal has been removed from vaccines, autism rates continued to rise. Such was the case for Denmark, which removed thimerosal in 1991, and the United States in 2003.
Doctors warn that ACIP's recommendation fails to consider these studies and the large body of evidence supporting vaccine safety. And that will inevitably have consequences for the health of Americans.
'Our studies show that vaccines are safe and effective. I recommend them based on my medical experience, but some people are going to refuse. And unfortunately, they're going to put themselves at higher risk of infection and they're going to put the people around them at higher risk of infection,' said Khan.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
19 beaches are closed in Massachusetts this weekend due to bacteria. Here's where
After the heat wave in Massachusetts this week, you may be in the mood to spend a day at the beach this weekend. However, if you're planning a weekend beach trip, you'll want to avoid the beaches closed due to unsafe swimming water. The Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) states that swimming in the water at these closed beaches poses a threat of illness due to high levels of bacteria. Symptoms of water-borne illness can range from nausea and vomiting to a sore throat and fever, or even rashes and infections. Heading into this weekend, 19 Massachusetts beaches are closed. Here's the full list. The following MA beaches, listed by town, are closed as of Friday, June 27: Andover: Pomps Pond (Bacterial Exceedance) Ashby: Damon Pond Beach (Bacterial Exceedance) Ashland: Ashland Reservoir Main Beach (Bacterial Exceedance) Ayer: Ayer Town Beach (Bacterial Exceedance) Bourne: Patuisset (Bacterial Exceedance) Brewster: Upper Mill Pond (Harmful Cyanobacteria Bloom) Danvers: Sandy Beach (Bacterial Exceedance) Framingham: Waushakum Beach (Bacterial Exceedance) Manchester: Magnolia (Bacterial Exceedance) Tuck's Point (Bacterial Exceedance) Marlborough: Henry F Collins Beach (Bacterial Exceedance) Natick: Cochituate State Park Beach (Harmful Cyanobacteria Bloom) Salem: Children's Island - Dock (Bacterial Exceedance) Saugus: Peckham Pond at Camp Nihan (Bacterial Exceedance) Templeton: Beamans Pond - Day Use (Bacterial Exceedance) Beamans Pond - Campground (Bacterial Exceedance) West Tisbury: Seth's Pond (Bacterial Exceedance) Winchester: Shannon Beach at Upper Mystic (Bacterial Exceedance) Most beaches are closed due to bacterial exceedance, meaning the levels of bacteria in the water are higher than the limits set by the MDPH. Those in the "other" category can be closed due to a variety of chemical or physical hazards, such as riptides and poor visibility. Beach parking: Want to park for free at the beach this summer in MA? Boston Beer Company can help Another popular beach is closed for the summer, but not due to bacteria. According to an announcement from the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) on May 30, the main beach at Walden Pond in Concord will be closed for the season as the site undergoes construction. Red Cross Beach, another beach at Walden Pond, will still be open for the summer, but with no lifeguards present and limited parking availability. Over the summer, Walden Pond will be getting a new $6.1 million bathhouse, according to the DCR. The new single-story, 2,700 square-foot building will replace the current two-story bathhouse from 1947, which is not ADA compliant. This project will bring Walden Pond State Reservation's facility up to federal and state accessibility requirements. More: Popular MA beach to stay closed all summer due to construction. Here's where According to the MDPH website, beaches can only re-open when their bacteria levels are back within the safe range, so there is no set amount of time for a closure. The status of a closed beach can be checked on the website's water quality dashboard, which is updated at 9:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. daily. This article originally appeared on The Patriot Ledger: Which Massachusetts beaches are closed this weekend? Here's a list

Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
Majority of working dads in study took under 2 weeks' family leave
Research points to paternal leave as good for both dads and babies — yet just 36 percent of fathers reported taking more than two weeks of leave when their child was born, and 64 percent said they took two weeks or less, according to a new analysis. Published in Pediatrics, the study is part of a first-of-its kind initiative that measured fathers' behavior and health in the months before and after their children's birth.


Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
How psychiatry and activism created the dangerous concept of 'transgender children'
In April 2007, millions of Americans tuned in to ABC's 20/20 as Barbara Walters introduced the world to psychiatry's most devastating creation: the "transgender child." In a segment titled "My Secret Self," Walters profiled three children—including a young Jazz Jennings—being raised as the opposite sex, explaining that they had been diagnosed with "gender identity disorder." The episode marks the moment the Western world lost its grip on reality. A brand-new type of human being had been conjured into existence through the collision of psychiatry, endocrinology, and political activism. Yet while the concept defied everything known about childhood development and identity formation, large swathes of society—almost overnight—began believing the unbelievable: that a child could be born in the wrong body. To understand how such a belief materialized, we must go back to an obscure corner of psychiatry in the 1960s, where a fringe group of doctors were studying what motivated men who believed they were women to seek hormones and surgeries. These researchers turned their attention to feminine boys, hoping to identify future transsexuals, and in the process they pathologized childhood gender nonconformity. In the decades that followed, it became clear that what those pioneers mostly found were not "transsexual children," but future homosexuals. However, by the time this was understood, it was too late. The seed had been planted—and the concept of the "trans child" was poised to take on a life of its own. A pivotal moment arrived in 1980, when "gender identity disorder of childhood" was included in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III). After the diagnosis was made official, along came the medical "solution": puberty suppression, developed in the Netherlands during the 1990s. While psychiatry conceived the idea, puberty blockers brought the transgender child to life. Before this intervention, it was impossible to raise a boy as a girl, or vice versa, with puberty looming on the horizon. But when the Dutch made puberty optional, they handed deeply misguided adults the means to sever gender-nonconforming children from the reality of their sexed bodies. At the same time, a critical shift was also unfolding in the realm of trans activism. In the 1990s, trans activists decided to redefine transgender identities as innate and healthy, rather than rooted in mental disorder or paraphilic desire. This wasn't grounded in new science; it was strategic rebranding. The old labels, while accurate, didn't suit the nascent movement's political goals. The concept of the transgender child, freshly minted by medicine, fit perfectly into this new narrative. If being trans is innate, then transgender children must exist. And if transgender children exist, then trans identities must be natural—not pathological or deviant. It was a self-justifying loop—circular and compelling, but based on ideology, not evidence. In the decades that followed, "trans kids" were thrust onto the forefront of what was framed as a civil rights struggle. This devastating convergence of medical, political, and cultural forces ensured that countless children—rather than being given the freedom to grow, mature, and explore different identities—were locked into a lifetime of medicalization, embodying an identity imposed upon them before they were old enough to understand what was at stake. Every story of a "trans kid" begins with tired stereotypes—little boys who like Barbies and princess gowns, or tomboys with short hair and a dislike of dresses. What separates a gender-nonconforming child from one diagnosed with gender dysphoria—now considered a "trans child"—is not biology, but belief. Specifically, the child's belief that they are the opposite sex. In our upside-down world, the child leads and the adults follow. Yet, only a society in the grip of mass psychosis could treat children as wise oracles capable of divining an authentic gender soul while still young enough to believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. The tragic reality is: trans kids don't exist. What does exist are gender-nonconforming children trying to make sense of themselves in a world that has abandoned reason in favor of ideology. These children—the majority of whom would grow up to be gay or lesbian—are being lied to during a crucial stage of identity development, and the consequences will haunt them for a lifetime. Once the forces that collided to create the transgender child—psychiatric labeling, medical experimentation, and activist messaging—are understood, the dark irony of trans activism's favorite slogan, Protect Trans Kids, becomes unmistakable. In truth, children need protection from the very people who believe there is such a thing as a trans kid. The crowds marching in the streets waving pink, blue, and white flags in zealous solidarity may see themselves as righteous heroes, but they are not fighting to protect children. Instead, they are modern-day Pied Pipers, luring confused, vulnerable children away from safety and down the dangerous path first paved by psychiatry—one of false promises and irreversible harm.