Fact Check: CDC cites non-existent study on thimerosal, claims scientist.

Fact Check: "CDC cites non-existent study on thimerosal, claims scientist."

What We Know

The claim that the CDC cited a non-existent study regarding thimerosal has emerged from discussions surrounding vaccine safety. Thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative, has been used in multi-dose vials of vaccines to prevent microbial growth. The CDC and various studies have consistently stated that there is no evidence linking thimerosal to autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders (CDC Thimerosal and Vaccines, FDA Thimerosal and Vaccines).

In a 2010 study, the CDC found that prenatal and infant exposure to vaccines containing thimerosal does not increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder (CDC Science Summary). Furthermore, the CDC has removed thimerosal from most childhood vaccines as a precautionary measure, although it remains in some flu vaccines (CDC Timeline of Thimerosal in Vaccines).

Analysis

The assertion that the CDC cited a non-existent study appears to stem from a misinterpretation or misrepresentation of the CDC's findings. The CDC has published numerous studies and reports confirming the safety of thimerosal in vaccines, and these documents are accessible to the public (CDC PDF on Thimerosal).

The claim's credibility is further undermined by the sources promoting it. Many of these sources are associated with anti-vaccine movements, which have a history of disseminating misinformation regarding vaccine safety (Reuters on CDC report, AP News on CDC's ACIP group).

In contrast, the CDC and other health organizations are reputable sources, backed by extensive research and peer-reviewed studies. Their findings are based on rigorous scientific methods and are supported by a broad consensus in the medical community.

Conclusion

The claim that the CDC cited a non-existent study on thimerosal is False. The CDC has consistently provided evidence supporting the safety of thimerosal in vaccines, and the assertion of a non-existent study lacks credible support. The claim appears to be rooted in misinformation propagated by anti-vaccine advocates rather than factual evidence.