I get it is a complex area fraught with agenda, but with valid arguments on both sides. Nice to stumble across info/pages like this…cheers

The answer is yes. Phenoxyethanol has a lower oral LD50 for rats than ethylene glycol. So the bottom line is, it doesn’t matter that phenoxyethanol has different chemical properties than ethylene glycol and cannot be used to keep our car fluids from freezing. The only chemical property that matters is that it has similar, if not higher, toxicity levels as ethylene glycol.

Seriously, though, I went and looked at your link and it doesn’t say anything at all about MMR and thimerosal. Please explain your point a bit further so I can figure out how to respond appropriately. Thanks.

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/q_a_thimerosal-eng.php

Who am I supposed to believe, you or my government? I don’t trust them either. This must be a pharmablog

Of course Inside Vaccines will be considered anti-vaccine.

Isn’t anyone, who brings up any valid questions about basic issues that might possibly impact on how parents make choices?

You should know, Epiwonk, that vaccine defenders specialize in OPINION about others, not the FACTs contrary to their own opinions.

Why don’t those people who consider Inside Vaccine’s arguments so “bad” come and redirect if they think Inside Vaccines facts are wrong?

Probably because the thought of admitting they might be wrong, and Inside Vaccines might be right, would mean re-evaluating the possibility that their personal decisions might have been swayed by flawed fallacies.

AS MV said. We don’t care what other people think. The people we parents care about, are other parents in similar positions to ourselves.

You know, people are going to think whatever they want to think. Extremists are always going to want to project extremism onto others. We’re not really “in” the blogosphere “loop” too much anyway, I don’t think. We’re more of a resource for people who aren’t in the market to sign up with a fanatical “team” in the vaccination debate.

We don’t really worry hugely about the number of comments we receive or don’t receive about our blog posts. Insidevaccines has a nicely developed link distribution system. Our team puts up links to our articles on a variety of forums. Anytime one of us sees a relevant discussion we pop up a link. All of our articles, even some which are quite old are still in circulation via this elegant system. One of the advantages of producing a blog as a team, rather than as a single hot-shot!

As far as our reputation as an anti-vaccine blog, ad hominem attacks always reflect more on the attackers than on the attacked. Recently someone posted a link to our series on the problem of serotype replacement with bacterial vaccines on a forum (which will remain unnamed). The opponent in the debate refused to read the series, stating that they didn’t want to risk confusion by reading anti-vaccine propaganda. People who think that way are hopeless…and definitely not our target audience.

It seems you guys aren’t big fans of PR and “framing,” but something has to be done about your reputation. I don’t mean this analogy to be sexist, but this reminds me of the classic situation of the poor innocent junior high school girl who gets a reputation as a “slut” just because her breasts are large.

Don’t know of a solution off-hand.