Formaldehyde in Vaccines: A DNA Adduct?

Ingredients in vaccines have been shown to harm your DNA

The U.S. National Library of Medicine at NIH in January 2010 published online the “Final Report on Carcinogens Background Document for Formaldehyde.” [1] It’s an interesting document in many respects, especially since it details in vitro and in vivo studies in lab animals, i.e., rats, mice, and hamsters.

Experimental Animals: Formaldehyde has been tested for carcinogenicity in mice, rats, and hamsters.  Studies reviewed include chronic and subchronic inhalation studies in mice, rats, and hamsters; chronic and subchronic drinking-water studies in rats, and hamsters; chronic and subchronic drinking-water studies in rats; and one chronic skin-application study in mice.  No chronic studies in primates were found, but one subchronic inhalation study and one acute/subacute inhalation study in monkeys was reviewed. [1]

Granted, there was much detail given to inhalation of formaldehyde gas with some studies documenting the effects of adding formaldehyde to the animals drinking water.  However, there were no studies performed on injecting formaldehyde into the animals, as often occurs when vaccines containing formaldehyde are injected into infants, toddlers, teens, adults, and senior citizens.

Question: Why no injection studies on formaldehyde? Since formaldehyde or Formalin are excipients used in the manufacture of the following vaccines:

Anthrax (BioThrax), DTaP (all brands), DTaP-Hep B-PPV (Pediarix), DTaP-Hib (TriHIBit), DT (all brands), Td (all brands), Hepatitis A (Havrix, Vaqta), Hepatitis A-Hepatitis B (Twinrix), Hib (ActHIB), Hib-Hepatitis B (Comvax), Influenza (Fluzone, Fluarix, FluLaval), Japanese encephalitis (JE-Vax), Polio-virus inactivated (Ipol), Tdap (Adacel, Boostrix) per the CDC’s PinkBook, Vaccine Excipient & Media Summary, pg. E-2

Probably I’m going to be accused of “cherry picking” data, so up front I admit that, that’s exactly what I’m doing to make a specific point which is, the report stated that

Unmetabolized formaldehyde reacts non-enzymatically with sulfhydryl groups or urea, bind to tetrahydrofolate and enters the single-carbon intermediary metabolic pool, reacts with macromolecules to form DNA and protein adducts, or forms crosslinks primarily between protein and single-stranded DNA (Bolt 1987).

Okay! So what happens when formaldehyde or Formalin in a vaccine suspension interacts with body chemistry in an infant whose immune system and blood brain barrier are not fully developed?

We know that the body metabolizes ‘ingredients’ differently depending upon whether they are ingested and transit the digestive tract, or if they are injected intramuscularly and can become problematic.

The Carcinogens Background Document found the following:

Formaldehyde ingestion results in severe corrosive damage to the gastrointestinal tract followed by CNS depression, myocardial depression, circulatory collapse, metabolic acidosis and multiple organ failure. The toxic effects of formaldehyde in experimental animals include irritation, cytotoxicity, and cell proliferation in the upper respiratory tract, ocular irritation, pulmonary hyperactivity, bronchoconstriction, gastrointestinal irritation, and skin sensitization.  Other reported effects include oxidative stress, neurotoxicity, neurobehavioral effects, immunotoxicity, testicular toxicity, and decreased liver, thyroid gland, and testis weights (IARC 2006, Asian et al. 2006, Sarsilmaz et al. 2007, Golalipour et al. 2008, Ozen et al. 2005, Majumder and kumar 1995).  [My emphasis added]

Shouldn’t the CDC and FDA be concerned about the use of formaldehyde and Formalin in vaccines in view of the above damage, especially since the report makes this incriminating statement about ingestion?  What happens with injection?  No one knows!

Numerous agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, CPSC, DOT, EPG, FDA, HUD, the Mine Safety and Health Administration, OSHA, ACGIH, and NIOSH, have developed regulations and guidelines to reduce exposure to formaldehyde.

Now get this: Big Pharma is making and selling—while MDs, nurses, etc. are injecting—formaldehyde-containing vaccines into infants as young as 24 hours old.  Unbelievable?  No!  Factual.

The key to all the above, as I assess it, is this which the formaldehyde document points out:

Genetic and related effects: Formaldehyde is a direct-acting genotoxic compound that affects multiple gene expression pathways, including those involved in DNA synthesis and repair and regulation of cell proliferation. … In vitro studies with mammalian and human cells were positive for DNA adducts, DNA-protein crosslinks, DNA-DNA crosslinks, unscheduled DNA synthesis, single-strand breaks, mutations, and cytogenetic effects (chromosomal aberrations, sister chromatid exchange, and micronucleus induction).

A DNA adduct is, as I pointed out in my 2009 book, Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, (available on Amazon here) a base in the DNA covalently [sharing electrons from one to another] bonded to a (cancer-causing) chemical.  This has been shown to be the start of a cancerous cell, or carcinogenesis.

Now, I have one more question to ask, and it is this:  Coincidentally childhood cancers have been on the rise precipitously and concomitantly, it seems, with the rise in mandated vaccinations starting as early as birth (Hepatitis B vaccine is administered then).  What connection is there between formaldehyde and Formalin in vaccines with childhood cancers?  How does that question correlate with this information from the National Cancer Institute FactSheet Childhood Cancers?

Among the 12 major types of childhood cancers, leukemias (blood cell cancers) and cancers of the brain and central nervous system account for more than half of the new cases. About one-third of childhood cancers are leukemias. The most common type of leukemia in children is acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The most common solid tumors are brain tumors (e.g., gliomas and medulloblastomas), with other solid tumors (e.g., neuroblastomas, Wilms tumors, and sarcomas such as rhabdomyosarcoma and osteosarcoma) being less common. [2]  [My emphasis]

Now go back and read what the Carcinogens Background Document found and see if there are any dots that can be connected.  Shouldn’t some member of Congress be asking questions or investigating vaccines?

 

Sources:
[1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20737003 accessed 2/6/12

[2] http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Sites-Types/childhood accessed 2/6/12

 

Photo Credit: Andy Lepp

  • DrKete

    You will never get anyone from the US Congress to investigate since they receive a lot of money from the drugs and surgery pushers.  It’s a mindset.  Somewhere along the way it has become accepted that drugs are the treatment of choice for every little thing and surgery is next if the drugs are a problem.   The only issue I have with your article is that it is difficult to isolate the factor that causes the increase in cancers.  It is probably a number of factors all interacting.  Vaccine mandates are just evil.  This never should have been legislated.  People should be able to choose and then we would see which camp is correct.  Every living thing subject to human intervention is getting vaccinated for all sorts of things.  Not because the diseases are deadly, but because someone has invented a vaccine so why not use it?  It is getting rarer and rarer to have a proper control group for testing.

  • Kristi Mcgrath

    As a RN, the hospital I work in is now trying to make Flu Vaccines mandatory for their staff, we have refused this year, are required to watch a 10min. video on the “risks” of not having the vaccine, etc. Then they warn us of next year, the hospital will be tougher and we could possibly lose our jobs! This is outrageous. I try honestly try and talk my patients out of getting their flu and pneumococcal vaccines, since they are toxic containing. I try and help my patients with a more natural approach to their health with my website; http://www.NutrametrixNurse.com. There is a tab for health care professionals, the password is “health”. Contact me if you would be interested in Nutrametrix for your patients as well.

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    Dr Kete,
    I agree with what you say.  However, I feel we still have to hope that the way our form of government was set up–Congress has oversight–will prevail in both spirit and actual workings of our democratic republic, which I think we are losing every day to corporate governance that has overtaken federal government agencies that should be protecting the public from pseudo science and not disseminating it.  The report I cite in the article somehow contradicts what’s going on within agencies.

    Numerous agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security, CPSC, DOT, EPG, FDA, HUD, the Mine Safety and Health Administration, OSHA, ACGIH, and NIOSH, have developed regulations and guidelines to reduce exposure to formaldehyde.

    Doesn’t it seem that no one crossreferences information, otherwise formaldehyde and Formalin should not be included in vaccines or ANY pharmaceutical, if I read the report’s findings correctly.

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    Nurse MdGrath,
    I looked at your web site and commend you for what you are doing.  It’s nice to know that there are healthcare professionals doing what you do.  Bless you!

  • Lowell Hubbs

    It is more important to speak your conscience and never compromise that nor give in, no matter the consequences are. That way a person can stand with no regrets as to having supported and done the wrong thing. When it no longer matters to a human being what they need to compromise to keep their job and career, it trully shows us how far as a society we and they have fallen. I know the often circling attack and the battle all to well. It is never about honesty, nor real science. It is about falsely saving face and credibility, medical and vaccine politics, and saving careers. Never, never, compromise what you know and believe; at the expense, health, and well being of others. Have you considered moving to the naturopathic side of it all? I think you would do well; and the protecting wolves are far less likely to bite, in that arena. 

    A true nurse goes into the field well intended and intending to help as many as possible, and then finds out the scope of the practice so limits them as to true health care and healing. They find out that the politics of the game silence what is known, and can be learned. You play ball their way, or lose the ball; it is at times said. Not that nurses are not very needed; the most definately are and their education must be extremely challenging. It is just the rest of the picture regarding the basics of health care in the allopathic circles, which dogmatically exclude all forms of natural means to health. Providing what the human body needs to prevent illness and as well heal itself. In fact this is what true healing is about. It is not about the exclusion of anything but endess precription drugs, toxic vaccines, and surgery. How has that been working out for them? If that were the solution, the US should contain the most healthy people on the planet. Does it? Just the opposite. We are becoming a bankrupt and personally bankrupt nation, largely because of this failed system of health care that refuses to reconsider why it is failing. And why is that? Because they already know; they knew 100 years ago, if you consider the real history and players in it all. The whole picture comes together very well, when you see the how and why of the entire picture.

  • Lowell Hubbs

    Keep these articles coming. We need more of that!

    It remains absolutely mind boggling and amazing to me that mainsteam and the CDC continue to claim that all the science is in as to safety and effectiveness of vaccines. No need to question anything. No need to take another look. How irresponsible is that? They already know the truth; and they have clearly known for years. Their holy grail of modern medicine Goliath, simply is not going to be allowed to fall; nor them. How simple is this? And they they claim anyone who disagrees, is scientifically illiterate and mislead? A conspiracy theorist? They call the vaccine truthers, and the information as well, intellectually dishonest? Wow.

    The studies on the adverse effects of not only formaldehyde are not only there, but also the many studies on the neurological effects of aluminum. And we are just at the tip of the iceburg as to the effects of the ingredients, and combining all the ingredients in vaccines.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Ingaorama Ingibjörg Gunnlaugsdóttir

    I want to start with tanking you Catarina for your grait posts..It is like they want to change our DNA and mutate but when that happens ( as far as I know ) it mean that  when you have got some genetic disease..and they try to tell you that you have inherited the “disease” from your parent..Well..after your DNA has mutated and you will have some kids they are likely to inherited the disease..Some doctor´s t and scientist say  foreign DNA ..meaning from another species like monkey, chicken, calf blood serum and not forget aborted embryo but they grow viruses on tissues from these..can get stored in and mutate our RNA and later “wake” up …So it is not only the formaldehyde who is mutating our DNA. Viruses have to be grown on a living tissue since they are not a cell..This part is from here Viruseshttp://faculty.clintoncc.suny.edu/faculty/michael.gregory/files/bio%20102/bio%20102%20lectures/viruses/viruses.htm
    Viruses are not cells. They do not have a cell membrane or
    other components of living cells.

    Living host cells are required for their reproduction. Outside of the
    host, they act as nonliving chemicals.

    They do not metabolize or respond to stimuli.

    They have genetic material and can therefore mutate and evolve.

    They form parasitic relationships with living organisms; the virus benefits at the
    expense of the living organism.
    Well..I wonder if the human race will not end up looking like a mixture of these animals the tissue is from who is used in growing viruses..I think I see the picture of Satan in front of me..as future look of mankind :-(..Taking the look of the animals into the picture they use the  tissue from  to  brewing vaccines… So …since when they should need formaldehyde in vaccine to kill viruses if virus is not a live? If virus was a live then it would not need a host true?  Well….here you see what formaldehyde is used for 
    9 CFR 113.200 – General requirements for killed virus vaccines. 
    http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/200-requirements-killed-virus-vaccines-19610656   (f) Formaldehyde content. If formaldehyde is used as the killing agent,
    the residual free formaldehyde content must not exceed 0.74 grams per
    liter (g/L) as determined using the ferric chloride test. 3 
    I wonder if formaldehyde is making children and grown up more fat and obese  since formaldehyde do store in our fat cells ( mostly on hips and thighs…) Formaldehyde is also in Aspartame in that way that methanol ( in Aspartame) do brake down into formaldehyde at 86F and our stomach is 96-97F..So this shit is attacking us from all places an both vaccine and Aspartame is  controversial…and in my opinion neither of them is making you a healthy slender human….But both make new and foreign diseases..which again make huge profit in the pockets of the drug company´s and their share holders…Some get wealth while you loose your health…

  • http://www.facebook.com/Ingaorama Ingibjörg Gunnlaugsdóttir
  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lowell-Hubbs/1285214003 Lowell Hubbs

    Just some advise. You may need to log in with a facebook or a google acct here; as then you can go back in and correct the formatting errors as to your links. With the standard log in you will not be able to. Something with the code not getting cleaned in the box typed in here, as to the formatting or something. I have had the same problem. We need to get the available information out there that we can, and looks like you have some of that.  

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    Thank you for your comments, which enhance my article, and participating in sharing information that others may not know.

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    The link you provided is most helpful in understanding genetic material and thank you very much for sharing it.  I hope everyone who reads my article will take the time to study the link you so kindly provided.  I appreciate your enhancing my article. http://faculty.clintoncc.suny.edu/faculty/michael.gregory/files/bio%20102/bio%20102%20lectures/viruses/viruses.htm

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    The link you provided is most helpful in understanding genetic material and thank you very much for sharing it.  I hope everyone who reads my article will take the time to study the link you so kindly provided.  I appreciate your enhancing my article. http://faculty.clintoncc.suny.edu/faculty/michael.gregory/files/bio%20102/bio%20102%20lectures/viruses/viruses.htm

  • Catherine J Frompovich

    The link you provided is most helpful in understanding genetic material and thank you very much for sharing it.  I hope everyone who reads my article will take the time to study the link you so kindly provided.  I appreciate your enhancing my article. http://faculty.clintoncc.suny.edu/faculty/michael.gregory/files/bio%20102/bio%20102%20lectures/viruses/viruses.htm

  • Angel

     Kristi, keep up the great work. I used to be a Respiratory Therapist and used to do the same. In fact, that is how I lost my job. I went head to head with a doctor who ordered unwarranted ABG on a 14 year old. I did a work up, asked all the pertinent questions to r/o pulmonary emboli, diabetes, anything that would have made this patient SOB, did an external P ox, RR, HR Lung sounds and noting warranted this diagnostic procedure so I talked to the parents and told them everything and they refused, told the doc and he got me fired. In the interim, he insisted on the test, (very difficult stick BTW as I KNEW it would be), and it only served to back up my initial findings. The test was not needed. This doctor had ordered unnecessary tests before and I got sick of it. It was for this reason medical insurance keeps going through the roof. All this unnecessary testing, pushing employees to the limit to when they are run down and get sick…so much more.

    Just be careful in everything you do. If you truly value your job. Honest health care professionals like us don’t last long once we are found out.

    I also took an oath that if I was ever called back into this work force, I would let NO ONE make me use my skills to take a life or cause harm to others!

  • KEA

    As the mother of an 8 yo boy with high-functioning autism (HFA) and an 11 mo boy , I have been very concerned about the ingredients in vaccines for some time now.  Along with the known dangers of formaldehyde, I have also been very concerned with the high levels of aluminum which is a known neurotoxin.  The FDA, as indicated in the Code of Federal Regulation Title 21, clearly states that patients with impaired kidney function who receive levels of aluminum at greater than 4 to 5 microgram/kg/day, accumulate aluminum at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity.  Therefore, according to their guidelines, a 10 lb. infant should receive no more than 18 to 22.5 micrograms of injected aluminum a day.  Given this known fact, the FDA continues to offer no guidance or warning labels for vaccines that contain injected aluminum.
     
    While it is understood that this regulation applies specifically to patients with impaired kidney function, this should also apply to normal full-term infants whose kidneys continue to mature throughout the first year of life.  According to the vaccine schedule recommended by the CDC, injected aluminum from vaccines can reach upwards of 1200 to 1500 micrograms in a single office visit at the 2 month, 4 month and 6 month visit.  Is upwards of 75 times the limit set for a premature infants safe for a full-term infant?  Where are the warning labels for the vaccines that contain aluminum?   The CDC mentions in their public literature that we continually ingest aluminum everyday with no health effects.  Unfortunately, they strangely do not differentiate between injected aluminum and ingested aluminum.  Are we so ignorant to assume that there is no difference?  Especially when there are additional ingredients like Polysorbate 80 which, while deemed safe in food products, is often used in pharmaceutical drugs to break down the blood-brain barrier. 
     
    My pediatrician continues to defend the fact that vaccines are completely safe.  My son who has HFA received every vaccination and flu-shot completely on schedule.  He now also has many food allergies (soy, peanut, legumes, apples, peaches, pears, plums).  This is the first year we skipped the flu shot and I have adopted a 1-shot per visit vaccine schedule for our infant son.

  • Johnnet

    Conculsions made in this article that the dangers of acute exposure of formaldehyde on humans comes from formaldehyde exposure data that specifically says “chronic” application or ingestion in rodents.  There is some relationship between the conclusion and data but only enough to continue testing, not enough to come to the conclusion that acute formaldehyde exposure from vaccine causes cancer, organ falure or any of the other side affects listed in this article.     

  • Luci

     What about the amounts that are given for each dose though? I mean, I’m not disagreeing with you, but I was reading today that they are trace amounts, and formaldehyde and aluminium apparently occur in nature anyway, with our bodies producing more than 5 times the amount of formaldehyde that is put in a single vaccination dose.

  • Luckyrabbit

    That was just a part of the analysis in the section of what they found in experimental animals.  You don’t need chronicity for genotoxic effects like she wrote about “Genetic and related effects: Formaldehyde is a direct-acting
    genotoxic compound that affects multiple gene expression pathways,
    including those involved in DNA synthesis and repair and regulation of
    cell proliferation. … In vitro studies with mammalian and human cells
    were positive for DNA adducts, DNA-protein crosslinks, DNA-DNA
    crosslinks, unscheduled DNA synthesis, single-strand breaks, mutations,
    and cytogenetic effects (chromosomal aberrations, sister chromatid
    exchange, and micronucleus induction).”