The Bell has Tolled for Aluminium Adjuvants

Industry complacency and arrogance now defines the dangers of aluminium adjuvants in vaccines

The recent publication of our research measuring the aluminium content of infant vaccines should be sufficient to end the use of aluminium adjuvants in vaccines (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X21000523?via%3Dihub). The data show that the aluminium content of vaccines bears little or no resemblance to that given by the manufacturers and printed in the patient information leaflet. These data are approved by regulatory bodies such as the FDA and EMA though both of these organisations admit to accepting manufacturer’s data without further verification.

Manufacturers have not contested or refuted our findings. Their admission of guilt asks a number of critical questions. If one assumes that aluminium content was critical in optimising vaccine efficacy during development, for example in establishing antibody titres, then why is aluminium content no longer important in the commercial product. We found that the aluminium content of vaccines within batches varied significantly. What then are the implications of such when vaccines are administered. What happened to the requirement to achieve effective antibody titres in recipients. The laissez faire attitude of manufacturers towards the aluminium content of vaccines begins to suggest that they are only interested in selling their product and have no interest in whether it is effective. We already know that they have no consideration for vaccine safety. How do we know that the routine administration of vaccines, for example to infants, actually prevents disease. Are respective antibody titres in vaccine recipients measured at any point following vaccination. Is there a body that monitors whether vaccines in everyday life achieve the endpoints that are shown in clinical studies used for their approval.

When the EMA and FDA (finally) admitted that the aluminium content of vaccines were not independently verified they volunteered the information that all the other components of vaccines were measured and verified by themselves. I have not seen these data nor do I know where I might find such data. However, as someone who spent the best part of forty years measuring myriad components in the presence of saturating amounts of aluminium I can attest to the difficulty of such measurements. When, in preparing vaccines, parts per billion amounts of antigen are mixed in saturated solutions/suspensions of parts per million amount of aluminium adjuvant the assumption that the former will be homogeneously distributed within the latter is ludicrous. It is inevitable that every subsample of such a preparation will be composed of different amounts of adjuvant AND different amounts of antigen. The former is what we have found for all infant vaccines. The latter is almost certainly also true though awaits independent verification.

I worry all the time about injecting aluminium into any human being and especially infants. My concern is only heightened by the very real possibility that all aluminium adjuvanted vaccines are shams with absolutely no (guaranteed) health benefit. Until the vaccine manufacturers prove otherwise, independently verified, there should be a moratorium on the continued use of such vaccines.