Just sayin’, “Hey, Vix!”
for the same reason that I lobby for democracy. Just because it’s there doesn’t mean you can’t lobby for it to continue, change, evolve or improve.
- She’s not anti-vacs - any truly objective, rational, logical person would know that.
- The scandalous and libelous ‘Body Count’ website is equivalent to the National Enquirer. It implies she is guilty of negligent homicide. If she was, she would be standing trial.
- There is absolutely not direct link between her and any deaths.
- The author of the website could be sued for libel.
- Guys like you buy into that guy’s woo.
It seems like guys like you have a deep seated emotional need to beat someone up. If you can’t find a legitimate target, you invent one.
Well, if we’re to take the statement literally – that she is not against any and all vaccinations – then no, of course not. If we’re to take it at what it means whenever any objective, rational, logical person says it – that she thinks there is an issue with the current vaccination course – then yes, she is most certainly anti-vax. You’re trying to offer up some kind of all-encompassing definition of “anti-vax” to which no one subscribes.
Damn…you got us. And after the site goes to such lengths to tie McCarthy directly to each and every anti-avax illness. Why, they should…errr, hold on, what does the site say again?
Whoops! Never mind…
That really is the perfect statement in a discussion about the anti-vax movement, isn’t it?
The site says: “Jenny Mc. Body Count” body count means the amount of dead people. When a person creates a body count it is either accidental, negligent or intentionally. Body count as in war.
The guy starts out with an incriminating and provacative title that makes one think she is directly responsible for negligent homicide and the guy covers his ass with a chicken shit, cop out disclaimer to distance himself from the original message…oops! The trouble is with some people is that they have a deep seated emotional need for targets to vent on. This guy served it up on a platter for you and your psychological reality map selectively edited out that which did not conform to its architecture.
I suggest you read this book to see what you fell for and how you fell for it.
Hi,
Vaccines have terrible ingredients. They may kill your children. My son was badly harmed by them. Oh and the diseases they prevent? Totally minor. Besides vaccine companies make lots of money from them.
But I’m not really anti-vaccine. Oh no I’m not I swear. Oh no.
:rolleyes:
She’s an ignoramus devoid of the slightest understanding of facts.
Here’s just one example:
That one statement shows just how ill informed she is. That was not a vaccine her son got. It was heel stick to check for genetic diseases like pku. She’s a fucking idiot.
Hey, yourself! 
Congrats on the kid!
CDC used to have an emailing, mortality and morbidity weekly … not sure if it still exists but I subscribed for a while about 10 years ago =)
no dog in this fight [or kids for that matter] but the only way that you could conclusively prove to these idiots that vaccinations dot cause autism is if you literally took every pair of identical twin in the world born recently enough to need to start their vaccinations [and every pair of twins for the next decade] and innoculated one, and not innoculated the other, then release into the wilds to live until recaptured and examined periodically for autism. If the innoculated twins are then diagnosed autistic there might be some small validity that needs to be examined.
however I bet that both twins would be autistic if the innoculated one was …
Yep, you can subscribe for free via e-mail. Got to love a publication called “Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report”.
How else are you gonna know important stuff like how to protect yourself at the petting zoo?
An evil petting zoo?
Regards,
Shodan
Was there ever a reason to believe the autism link was anything but made up out of thin air? Should we have to risk childrens’ health to disprove claims that were never legitimate to begin with?
Conpiracy theorists always try to shift burden of proof onto anyone but themselves. They fight dirty.
Well, yes and no. The original cooked research on a small study by Dr. Asshat showed a link - so it was at least worth a glance to see his methodology, and conduct further reserach. Which they did - and his methodology was (intentionally) flawed and many later, larger, better studies were conducted with no link.
So it wasn’t pulled completely out of thin air - it was pulled out of the ass of a doctor who cooked data so some lawyers could use that data in a lawsuit.
Newsweek wrote an article attacking Oprah’s tendency to present anyone who claims to have gotten better on a quack treatment as someone qualified to give medical advice. Page 2 and 3 deal with McCarthy.
The article is extremely soft and gently critical. What is wrong with our society that we need to give reverence to woo bullshit and quackery?
Beyond that, they conveniently reject any evidence they don’t like as being manufactured by the Conspiracy. Like this person:
“None of your numbers, pharma-shilled studies and politically-influenced court decisions amount to a thimbleful of proof that vaccines don’t increase the incidence of autism.”
That quote is from Jay Gordon M.D., Jenny McCarthy’s pediatrician and one of the chief enablers of her anti-vax nonsense.
Jenny’s enablers carry heavy responsibility for her spewings.
I’d be (slighty, but not enough to do anything about it) interested in seeing how many different stories McCarthy has told about how her son got his autism diagnosis.
I think there are three: One, that she had no idea until a Dr gave her the diagnosis during an office visit. Two, she knew something was wrong and took him form Doc to Doc until diagnosed. And three, that he began behaving stangely following some immunization.
IMHO it starts with our society’s need to give reverence to religious woo, bullshit and quackery. Ignorance and superstition begets ignorance and superstition.
It was also based on the feelings of mothers like Ms. McCarthy who noticed the onset of autistic symptoms about the time their kids got a bunch of injections (18mo?). And not being scientifically minded, they assumed direct causation: vaccinations=autism. Ms. McCarthy has been quoted as saying the feelings of mothers should carry more weight than studies by scientists or opinions of doctors: “the mommy instinct.”
This is one of the sad things about autism, the symptoms aren’t (in my [very limited] experience) from birth. My nephew could speak a few words and engaged directly until he was about two. Then nothing, he’s completely non-verbal.