A new paper (Crepeaux et al.) by the Gherardi research group in France reports important results on the toxicity and transport of aluminum (Al) adjuvant in mice. This study is especially valuable because it looked at many outcomes: behavioral effects, immune (microglial) activation in the brain, and Al transport into the brain. The study tested dosages of 200 , 400 and 800 mcg/Kg (mcg=micrograms, mcg/Kg = micrograms per kilogram of animal body weight), injected intramuscularly (IM). The Al adjuvant used was AlOH (brand name Alhydrogel), the most common vaccine adjuvant. It is in the tetanus, Hep A, Hep B, HiB, pneumococcal, meningococcal, and anthrax vaccines.

Remarkably, the study found that the lowest dosage (200 mcg/Kg) was the most toxic! The 400 and 800 mcg/Kg dosages produced no statistically significant effects, but the 200 mcg/Kg dosage did.

Compare these dosages with dosages given to human infants according to the CDCs vaccine schedule in the first 6 months:

Birth (Hep B): 74 mcg/kg (250 mcg for 3.4 kg infant)

2 month: 245 mcg/kg (1225 mcg for 5 kg infant)

4 month: 150 mcg/kg (975 mcg for 6.5 kg infant)

6 month: 153 mcg/kg (1225 mcg for 8 kg infant)

Crepeaux (paper): Non-linear dose-response of aluminium hydroxide adjuvant particles: Selective low dose neurotoxicity

The low toxicity of the higher dosages appears to be a consequence of dosage-dependent inflammation at the injection site. The high dosages caused intense inflammation at the injection site, forming “granulomas”. The 200 mcg/Kg dosage did not produce granulomas. Granulomas are hard nodules in tissue produced in response to injury, infection or foreign substances. Its a way the body “walls off” injured tissue and prevents the spread of infection or toxins. The granulomas apparently prevented Al adjuvant particles from leaving the injection site. This explains why the 200 mcg/Kg dosage affected the brain and behavior, while the higher dosages did not.

Accordingly, it may be more dangerous to administer numerous small doses of Al adjuvant, compared to a large dose that induces a granuloma.



Above: High dose Al adjuvant injection into the muscle causes a granuloma, which traps the Al adjuvant and prevents it from traveling into the brain. Low dose does not form a granuloma. Hence, the low dose is free to travel to the brain. Consequently, the lower dose is more toxic than the higher dose. This mechanism explains the surprising inverted dose-toxicity results of Crepeaux et al. 2017.

Learn about granulomas here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granuloma

In summary, the study found that the 200 mcg/Kg dosage caused behavioral abnormalities, a 50-fold increase in brain Al content, and inflammation/immune activation in the brain. These effects were not observed at the higher dosages of 400 and 800 mcg/Kg.

Toxicology Journal

The paper is from the journal Toxicology, which is well-respected in the field. It has a 5-year impact factor of 3.967. I think that journal impact factor is a poor, lazy way to evaluate a paper. Impact factor is commonly hacked and manipulated by journals and pharmaceutical companies (e.g. pharma pays ghost writers to publish papers citing papers favorable to the industry). I mention it because vaccine promoters often claim that vaccine-critical studies only appear in junky, predatory journals. That is definitely not the case here. See the journal website: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/toxicology

Of 115 scientific journals in the field of toxicology, the Toxicology journal is ranked #18 at the time of publication. http://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=3005&page=1&total_size=115

Study Design

The animals were 8-week old female mice (thats fully mature). 10 mice were in each of 4 groups (40 mice total). Al adjuvant was administered in 3 equal dosages, delivered 4 days and 4 days apart.

The 4 groups:

1) Control group. Received saline placebo by intramuscular injection (IM)

2) 200 mcg/Kg (received 3 X 66mcg/Kg IM)

3) 400 mcg/Kg (received 3 X 133mcgKg IM)

4) 800 mcg/Kg (received 3 X 266mcg/Kg IM)

180 days after the 3rd and final dose, the animals were subjected to behavioral testing, and then sacrificed for brain analysis. The animals were about 8 months old when sacrificed.

Are Human Infants Receiving Low Or High Dosages?

According to the US vaccination schedule recommended by the CDC, infants are urged to receive the following dosages of Al adjuvant:

Birth: 74 mcg/kg (250 mcg for 3.4 kg infant) (Hep B only)

2 month: 245 mcg/kg (1225 mcg for 5 kg infant) (Hep B, DTaP, HiB, pneumococcal, polio)

4 month: 150 mcg/kg (975 mcg for 6.5 kg infant) (DTaP, HiB, and pneumococcal)

6 month: 153 mcg/kg (1225 mcg for 8 kg infant) (Hep B, DTaP, HiB, pneumococcal, polio)

Since Al-containing vaccines are not given in exactly the same location (typically given on different limbs), each vaccine may provide a “low” local dose that does not form a granuloma. This suggests that the Al adjuvant can travel away from the vaccine injection sites.

How common are granulomas in infants receiving vaccines? Fortunately, there is a pretty good paper on this, and it reports a rate of 0.83%. Specifically, the paper states:

“The demonstration of long-lasting itching vaccination granulomas in 38 of 4,558 children (0.83 %) who received Al- adsorbed vaccines during their first year of life confirmed our hypothesis that 0.10–1.0 % of the children in the study would be afflicted.“

Of course, this is alarming because it suggests that in about 99% of children the Al adjuvant is not confined in a granuloma; it can leave the injection site and travel into the brain. Paper: How-common-are-long-lasting-intensely-itching-vaccination-granulomas

Detailed Results

Behavioral Effects

Significant differences in behavior were observed in open field tests in the 200 mcg/Kg group, but not in the higher dosage or control groups.

In an open field test the mice are placed, individually, in an empty walled enclosure and allowed to explore. The movements of the mice are tracked by computer vision, which measures distance traveled and time spent in different areas of the field (e.g. in the central area vs peripheral area near the walls), and other characteristics. Open field tests are well-known and are used to detect neurotoxicity. Open field tests have been used in neuroscience for decades.



Above: Mice in the 200 mcg/Kg group (green) displayed significant behavioral abnormalities in the open field tests. They moved less than control mice (grey), and spent more time in the central area of the field. These changes indicate neurotoxicity. The higher dosages had no effect on behavior. Grip strength reduction in the 200mcg/Kg group was close to statistical significance. Human autistics also have movement abnormalities and reduced grip strength. From Crepeaux et al. 2017.

Aluminum Brain Content

The 200mcg/kg dosage caused a 50-fold increase in median brain aluminum content, 180 days after injection. The aluminum persists in the brain long term. Brain Al content was 0.02 mcg/gram dry weight in controls, and 1.00 mcg/gram dry weight in the 200 mcg/Kg group. The high dosages did not cause a significant increase in brain Al content. This is consistent with the open field test results, which were not affected by the higher dosages.



Above: The 200mcg/Kg dosage increased median brain aluminum content 50-fold, from 0.02 mcg/gram to 1.00 mcg/gram dry weight. The higher dosages did not increase brain Al levels, presumably because the Al adjuvant was trapped in the granulomas. These measurements were performed 6 months after the final injection, indicating that the Al persists in the brain long-term. Levels above 2 mcg/gram are considered by researchers (e.g. Dr Chris Exley) to be of pathological concern. Alzheimers victims often have Al levels of 3-10mcg/gram aluminum in some areas of the brain (aluminum distribution in the brain is not uniform). From Crepeaux et al 2017. (Note: ug = mcg = microgram).

Microglial Activation (Brain Inflammation)

Microglia are the immune system cells of the brain. Normally they are in a resting state. An “active” state indicates inflammation, which can be caused by infection, toxins or tissue injury. Activated microglia are capable of producing interleukin-6 (IL-6) and interleukin-17, cytokines that cause autistic behavior in animals.

The 200 mcg/Kg dosage caused microglial activation. This was determined by measuring the number of cells producing a protein called iba1, which is produced by microglia in an activated state. Microglial activation was also detected 180 days after injection, so the brain inflammation appears to be chronic, and perhaps permanent.

The increase in microglial activation unequivocally proves that Al adjuvant causes inflammation in the brain. However, neither IL-6 nor IL-17 were measured in this study.



Above: The 200mcg/Kg dosage increased activated microglia density in the brain, a sign of inflammation. Presence of the protein “iba1” indicates that the microglia are active. It is not yet known what cytokines these activated microglia are producing, but microglia are capable of producing IL-6 and IL-17. Elevated IL-6 and IL-17 cause autism. These measurements were performed about 6 months after the final injection, which strongly suggests that the microglial activation is a chronic, life-long condition. From Crepeaux et al. 2017.

Activated microglia play a role in autism. Human autistics have chronic microglial activation throughout the brain. A recent review paper (2015) on the topic of microglia and autism states:

“…any factors that alter the number or activation state of microglia either in utero or during the early postnatal period can profoundly affect neural development, thus resulting in neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism.“

Quote is from this paper: Role of Microglia in Autism: Recent Advances

The fact that aluminum adjuvant induces chronic microglial activation in the brain, at vaccine-relevant dosages, strongly implicates this vaccine ingredient as a cause of autism.

About 1.3% of the Adjuvant Traveled into the Brain.

The researchers provided approximate brain weight (at time of sacrifice) and body weight (at time of injection). This enables a calculation of the percentage of Al adjuvant that traveled to the brain. Specifically, the brain weights were about 400mg (0.4 grams), and the mice weighed about 30g at injection. The measured Al concentration in the brain was 0.2 mcg/g wet weight (equal to 1mcg/g dry weight). A simple calculation shows that for the 200mcg/kg dosage, about 1.3% of the injected Al traveled into the brain after 6 months.

Conclusion:

This study provides powerful evidence that Al adjuvant travels into the brain, and causes brain injury and brain inflammation. The Al adjuvant greatly increased brain aluminum content, caused pathological behavioral changes, and caused microglial activation. These adverse effects occurred at dosages lower than dosages given to human infants according to the CDC vaccination schedule.

The results clearly contradict the orthodox view that aluminum ingestion studies are a valid way of estimating Al adjuvant toxicity, as assumed by Mitkus et al. 2011. The Mitkus model of Al adjuvant toxicity is definitely wrong. The Mitkus study is analyzed here: http://vaccinepapers.org/debunking-aluminum-adjuvant-part-2/

The Crepeaux paper concludes:

“…comparing vaccine adjuvant exposure to other non-relevant aluminium exposures, e.g. soluble aluminium and other routes of exposure, may not represent valid approaches. For example, aluminium retention rate observed after intravenous injections of traceable soluble aluminium citrate (Priest, 2004) has been used to set up the reassuring infant retention model of aluminium adjuvants (Mitkus et al., 2011). This model was based on the hypothesis that aluminium adjuvants are solubilized by citrate ions in muscle interstitial fluid (Flarend et al., 1997), without any consideration of quick adjuvant cellular uptake and systemic long term diffusion of adjuvant agglomerates (Khan et al., 2013; Eidi et al., 2015). In the context of massive development of vaccine-based strategies worldwide, the present study may suggest that aluminium adjuvant toxicokinetics and safety require reevaluation.” (Emphasis added)

Indeed. A reevaluation of aluminum adjuvant safety is urgently needed. Claims of Al adjuvant safety are based on false and unscientific assumptions, are not supported by any experimental data with Al adjuvant, and are contradicted by these new experimental results.

Aluminum adjuvant is a dangerous vaccine ingredient. The evidence clearly shows it can cause brain injury at vaccine dosages.