| StoreTags: cranks, bad hair, say what?
Viewed 4077 times. 11 people liked this blog. You can rate it below if you haven't already.
People who enjoyed reading this: atum, cbit, frnortnr, Fredo, Zanf, jogn, breakscience, Moriarty, mlbot, Unknownforce, bitmarch
-->
When I first heard about the antivaccination lobby I thought it was some kind of weird intertubes joke. I mean, they were just playing, some kind of "save the whales and polio" joke, right? Right?
Wrong. They are dead serious.
And now it seems Donald Trump and Jenny McCarthy have joined the fray, claiming that vaccines cause autism.
A claim that has been shown to be incorrect.
A super hero team of paranoid new age scam artist homeopathy "remedy" selling pricks, the crappiest hair on tv and an mtv hasbeen, and they cannot even come up with some new meritless claim? What the fuck?
Sorry for ranting, the whole thing just gets me riled up.
And now back to the regular stuff, paper geese, smapples etc. | |
Comments
01/05/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
tantan
Chris - I see here a pretty healthy mix of respect for the scientific method and well-deserved skepticism of claims made by the guardians of that science. Where is the ignorance you perceive here? Give me better science than just saying that it's so. 
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
bitmarch
Zanf said: "What I find interesting in all this debate is the drawn lines of that "if you dont believe in/accept the benefits of vaccinations then you are against science and therefore a heretic and akin to ignorant savages deep in the African jungle" "
Actually, I don't feel that way at all, so I just want to clarify my perspective on things, and pardon me if this gets long winded. The MMR vaccine is the issue here. It was the MMR vaccine that was initially believed to be associated with autism , a claim that was based on limited evidence. Since then, better evidence has come out (a study which looked at a half a million patients to be exact) showing no association between the MMR vaccine and autism. And those negative studies are reproducible. So... the current evidence really does show, to the best that can be done in the realm of clinical investigation, that the MMR vaccine preparations that were used in those children do not cause autism. The only other study that could really be done would be a prospective randomized double-blinded placebo controlled trial... and those trials are extremely expensive to do. In fact, it seems very likely that the sample size required to do such a study would be so large that it would create a substantial financial burden on society. Also, although it's debatable, many people would argue that doing such a study would be unethical, since it would require one of the study groups to be treated with placebo instead the MMR vaccine, which is known to reduce the incidence of measles, mumps, and rubella.
So.. in terms of those people who claim that vaccines cause autism it's on the basis of crap evidence that's been refuted by decent evidence. Now, does that mean that other vaccines might cause autism? I suppose; it hasn't really been looked at since we've been obsessed with the MMR vaccine. And what about the above claim that vaccines cause cancer, or were used to commit genocide? Well, hell if I know if that's true or not; maybe tommytom can enlighten us with some real evidence. And the HPV vaccine? To be honest, it's new and I haven't encountered a situation where I had to consider prescribing it. So, I wouldn't want to comment on it without doing a thorough review of the literature. Again, if you could provide a link that would be great. If what you're saying is true, that's really concerning, but it doesn't surprise me that pharma could be pulling such nonsense again.
And no, I do not believe that pharmaceutical companies are purely here for our benefit. I was just one of a gazillion physicians who prescribed vioxx when it was still on the market, prior to the subsequent studies showing that it causes heart problems, so pharma has screwed me and my patients just as much as anybody else....
And we can debate whether scientific evidence is reality or not. I will be the first person to agree with you that the scientific method is imperfect. But we use it for a reason.. it's the best investigative method that we have. The scientific method really sucks if only one person has used it to arrive at a particular conclusion. But it really shines when mutiple unrelated investigators are able to arrive at the same conclusion via different approaches.
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
bitmarch
sorry, I hope I'm not killing this thread, because I think it's amazing.
edited: Jan 06 2008
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
crabster
Zanf said: "What I find interesting in all this debate is the drawn lines of that "if you dont believe in/accept the benefits of vaccinations then you are against science and therefore a heretic and akin to ignorant savages deep in the African jungle". A seeming unswerving belief that all what pharmaceutical companies do is purely for the benefit of the human race and a complete denial of the existance of the Medical Industrial Complex."
Really? While the track record of vaccination (in general) speaks for itself w. regards of it's efficacy, of course no industry should be given a free pass to do as they please. Or get away with bullshit. What the antivaccinationists what is to get rid of all vaccines. Which I doubt, abusive industrial practices be damned, you want as well.
It's just depressing to see shit like this pushed as an alternative...
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
cbit
zanf said: "What I find interesting in all this debate is the drawn lines of that "if you dont believe in/accept the benefits of vaccinations then you are against science and therefore a heretic and akin to ignorant savages deep in the African jungle". A seeming unswerving belief that all what pharmaceutical companies do is purely for the benefit of the human race and a complete denial of the existance of the Medical Industrial Complex."
I agree with tantan and bitmarch here. I don't see anyone blindly accepting a dogma ("all that pharmaceutical companies do is purely for the benefit of the human race"). This is about irrationality in the face of evidence (or lack of it).
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
bb01
evidence schmevidence - the whole point is that every theory that spawned an accepted methodology is still a theory.
even crackpots are right sometimes.
ofcourse people like the donald and the jenny are so removed from reality its not funny.
extremists from both sides are dangerous.
which is analogous to what zanf is saying, no?
once again, I find his view eloquently put forward and generally balanced.
book. cover. nuff said
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
tantan
Evidence shmevidence? Really?
Smoking => Cancer
Pollution => Global warming
Donuts => Fatness
All bullshit? Strange perspective, bb01, or do I misunderstand?
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
tantan
Dammit, no edits!
What I meant to ask is: At what point does crackpot cross the line into legitimacy if evidence is beside the point?
Also +1 Bitmarch, this thread is rad!
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
cbit
bb01 said: "evidence schmevidence - the whole point is that every theory that spawned an accepted methodology is still a theory."
How is that the point? how is it even worth mentioning?
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Zanf
Ive been elsewhere all day so havent had the chance to reply and elaborate further on what I posted earlier.
By saying, "What I find interesting in all this debate is...", I meant in the wider debate, not just what is being discussed here.
To extend on what I eluded to with the HPV vaccine is that in the UK, it is suggested that it will be compulsory for girls from the age of 11/12. Figures Ive seen [I will provide linkage later but its nearly 1am and I really have to sleep so not this very moment], suggest that HPV vaccination will save between 300 - 700 lives through avoiding cervical cancer in women at a cost of about £300 per course, per person. The numbers touted for adverse reaction will be something like 3000 so to save 300 - 700, upto 3000 women/girls will suffer adverse reaction at a massive cost to the taxpayer for rolling out the vaccine. The UK govt. hasnt yet said which vaccine product they will use so you can imagine the lobbying that is going on. Merck & Co, who manufactor one vaccine made huge lobbying in Texas to get the vaccine made compulsory.
With MMR, the original strain of measels that they used [Urabe] did cause both Japan and Canada to withdraw it and reassess it usage because of adverse reactions to it and pharma companies did alter it so MMR2 use a less virilent strain of the measels virus.
Its now been suggest that chicken pox vaccine is added to MMR yet both measels and chicken pox are more of a 'nuisance' than life threatening. It is possible to use zovirax to suppress the symptoms of chicken pox than roll out a vaccination prgramme that will only have a a short effective time span instead of allowing childhood infection and gaining lifetime resistance. Again, I will provide linkage at a more convenient time.
Hope this clarifies some of my points.
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
Zanf
One other subject I must include is I find it incredible that on one hand people laugh at the ignorance of Africans refusing vaccination programs through fear that they are being poisoned and yet put out results from studies suggesting that male circumcision will reduce the chance of infection of HIV, expecting people on a continent still almost submerged in superstition and not fully equiped with the ability to scientifically breakdown that information.
Instead of doing that shit, why not just say unequivocally: "using a condom is the best method of reducing risk of infection"?
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
bitmarch
Zanf said: "Hope this clarifies some of my points."
certainly does. please post your links or emmail me
it saddens me to hear that Merck is not learning from their mistakes.
01/06/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
bitmarch
just to be entirely clear, urabe had to do with meningitis, not autism
01/07/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
bb01
tantan said: "Evidence shmevidence? Really?
Smoking => Cancer
Pollution => Global warming
Donuts => Fatness
All bullshit? Strange perspective, bb01, or do I misunderstand?"
I could choose my words more wisely I guess.
Dont mean to provoke.
I meant that in earlier days, "evidence" was available that radiation was safe, that smoking was safe, ...
01/07/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
bb01
cbit said: " bb01 said: "evidence schmevidence - the whole point is that every theory that spawned an accepted methodology is still a theory." How is that the point? how is it even worth mentioning?"
Maybe its not 'the' point, but my point.
And I shouldnt have chimed in, because I agree about the "link" between autism and vaccines, just too thin to warrant a general ban on vaccines.
That theories are always theories is worth mentioning to people who blindly accept a theory.
Scientific evidence is not and should never be taken for absolute truth.
bitmarch said: "And we can debate whether scientific evidence is reality or not. I will be the first person to agree with you that the scientific method is imperfect. But we use it for a reason.. it's the best investigative method that we have. The scientific method really sucks if only one person has used it to arrive at a particular conclusion. But it really shines when mutiple unrelated investigators are able to arrive at the same conclusion via different approaches."
Again, didnt mean to provoke, I actually agree with lots of viewpoints adressed here.
Register / login
|
^
EM411 is Copyright 2001-2008 EM411.com
All rights reserved. | Contact | RSS
|
