So despite everything, reasonable, intelligent, compassionate people are apprehensive. Why do you think this is?
Instead of attacking the apprehensive as if they are scum, perhaps you could approach it at different angles.
Again - I’m not an opponent of immunizations - I am immunized and will immunize my children when the time comes to do so. However, I did not understand the need for yearly flu shots. Literally - reading this thread has opened my eyes quite a bit on the subject. I think it is healthy and important to play the devil’s advocate on an issue.
The problem, to me, is you neglect to realize that many people have so many things going on in their lives - intelligent, competent, hard-working people - that they cannot research every subject relevant to them and participate in worthwhile activities. But by demonizing an opponent on an issue you help only to dissuade individuals. I thought that would be common knowledge too. Then again, this is the pit, used for spitting venom…
People are apprehensive because anti-vaccination propagandists lie. They lie about research. They lie about science. They lie about statistics. And unfortunately, those “reasonable, intelligent” people often feel that BECAUSE they are reasonable and intelligent, they automatically understand statistics, epidemiology, disease history, virology, immunology, and other aspects of vaccinations without actually doing so.
Combine that with the ongoing anti-intellectualism in American society, the post-modern “there is no objective truth” belief system that everyone’s opinion is equally valid, and the denigration of science in general, and you get “reasonable, intelligent” people who deliberately turn their backs on science and research to take advice and information from non-experts on the Internet.
OF COURSE people don’t have time to research every subject relevant to them. But you know what I do when I don’t have time to research things that are important to me? I RELY ON THE EXPERTS. I go to people who’ve been studying the field for years, and look for a consensus.
Anti-vaxxers don’t do that. They REJECT the experts. They claim the CDC, the WHO, the IOM, and every local, state, and national government on the planet have all been bought off by pharmaceutical companies in a grand far-reaching conspiracy to spread vaccines for no good reason. They then claim that random conmen and frauds, or completely uneducated people on commercial websites, are BETTER sources of information than the experts.
The experts, the ones who’ve done the research, the ones who’ve made it their careers to explore this issue, are in consensus - vaccines are safe and save lives.
Which studies have you read that point you towards the anti-vaccination camp? Literally the only published studies in that regards were those by Andrew Wakefield, and those were proven frauds. Beyond that, all you have is a bunch of asinine idiots like Jenny McCarthy spewing misinformation and getting people hurt. Any of those studies you mention peer-reviewed? In a legitimate medical journal? I kinda doubt it…
I’m sorry, but your gut instinct is one of the first things you need to learn to abandon when talking science. And in this case, your gut is dead wrong. Vaccination is a long-established factor in medicine, as others have pointed out, and the amount of evidence backing up the legitimacy of vaccination in general is absolutely overwhelming. Individual vaccines specifically go through a rigorous bout of testing before being released on the public. The MMR vaccine, the vaccine that all this furor was built upon, had a very long record of being incredibly successful with no shown negative side effects.
There is an argument on the issue, but that the argument is still happening has nothing to do with the scientific veracity of the opposing side. There’s still “an argument on the issue” with regards to evolution vs. creationism; that doesn’t mean that you should chalk up Answers In Genesis as an equal source to the Harvard Biology department. The argument is still happening because one side does not know how to recognize when it is wrong. Look up many of the anti-vaccination sites, and check what their opinions are of the FDA. They are outright conspiracy theorists. They are not interested in the truth, or else they would not hold their position, because their position is untenable. There is no evidence linking MMR or any other vaccine to autism. None.
If you do not understand the concept of herd immunity, and the importance it holds to keeping our society safe from harm, it’s time you figured it out.
A more accurate quote:
It’s pretty straightforward. On one hand, you have the AMA, The FDA, Harvard Med, Oxford Med, Cambridge med, the NHS, and half the rest of the alphabet. On the other hand, you have… Um… Natural News, John Mercola, and an assortment of completely and utterly debunked quacks. Honestly, just look at the credentials. When every respectable medical organization on the planet is pointing one way, it’s probably the right way.
Good news is this. Bad news: you seem to think Mercola, Wakefield, McCarthy and whoever runs that shitstain of a site NaturalNews are “more intelligent people”. No. They’re not. You could be an inbred yokel with an IQ of 30, and they would not be “more intelligent people”. They are lying fuckwits, and I have about as much patience for them as I have for literalist creationist neo-nazis.
I was not saying that immunizations are in some way dehumanizing, I was saying that by polarizing the debate and demonizing the opponent you are hurting your argument, not helping it. I want human suffering no more than you, I am compassionate being, I hope.
And, I thought of course, that it was clear that I know we aren’t CURRENTLY required to get immunizations, rather I am afraid of a FUTURE scenario. I’m not on the anti “side” or the pro “side”. I am on the “want what is best for future generations” side. This means carefully weighing in on all ideas, even though they may seem foolish.
You’re right. What does warrant non-consideration is the complete and utter lack of any evidence backing up their assertions! There is NO EVIDENCE that vaccinations are harmful, save for in very rare allergic reation cases. None. Nada. Zip. THERE’S NOTHING THERE. The pot of “evidence for anti-vaccer claims” is empty. Or, to take you another way:
[QUOTE=Not him]
I know that the flat-earthers are a small minority…but that does not mean it doesn’t warrant consideration.
[/QUOTE]
We ignore anti-vaccers for the same reason we ignore flat-earthers and YEDs and NWO kooks - they’re dead wrong and have nothing to show - plus one: their misinformation is hurting people.
Live viruses/bacteria may have this effect; dead ones don’t. And that’s what virtually all vaccines are today: dead bacteria, or even better, just the outer shell, synthesized, with no actual harm possible. Please, learn how vaccines work. It’s a great step to figuring out why anti-vaccer claims are hilariously bullshit.
It really isn’t. The entire bulk of evidence - and it is a fucking shitload of evidence - we have points to the fact that the publicly available vaccines today are entirely safe, and that anti-vaccination claims are bullshit. The entirety of legitimate medical schools and societies agree that anti-vaccination claims are bullshit. The entirety of legitimate peer-reviewed medical journals agree that anti-vaccination claims are bullshit. There is no more complexity here than there is in the “debate” regarding evolution vs. creationism. One side has all the evidence, and one side has insane conspiracy theories.
Excuse my potential naivité (I’ve been absent from the boards for quite a while for assorted reasons), but I don’t think AnthonyElite is a shill, or an anti-vaccer ringer, or anything like that. I think he’s just confused, and looking for the truth in a sea of misinformation. And posts like this do not help. This is no Brazil84 or NewDealDemocrat who will jump right back on their pony who only knows one trick regardless of how many times we inform them that the trick has gotten old and the pony is dead. This is just a typical guy, and claiming that he’s using ignorance as an excuse (when by all accounts including his own he just seems to actually be somewhat ignorant) is not likely to entice him to see you as a beacon of reason.
And again, it boils down to “their ignorance is as good as the expert’s knowledge”.
Why? Because of the warm and fuzzies? Because so many people can’t be wrong about the safety of vaccines?
Meh. I really don’t care. There have been plenty of reasoned, well cited posts (despite this being a pit thread). They’ve had negligible effect on educating or changing minds.
Despite other posters presenting evidence, he hasn’t budged. I guess you can still give some benefit of the doubt, I’m not going to.
Effect of citations, research, and logic: 0
Effect of keeping it real: 0
So, might as well do what feels better. Seems to have about the same effect, and I’m certainly more entertained.
It does sometimes look as if there’s actually a debate on this, that there are two sides to the issue. That’s largely because, up to now, the experts have assumed that since vaccination is so obviously a good idea, everybody knows that. There hasn’t been nearly enough outspoken defense of vaccines because it didn’t seem that they needed defending. Which leaves the public square to those who are willing to shout their anger and their fear as loudly as they can, to as many people as will listen. They’ve made enough noise that it looks like there’s valid information backing them up.
Then they’re joined by those charlatans who have a financial interest in steering people away from standard medical practice to the stuff they sell, whether it’s books or supplements or advertising. There’s a lot of noise going on. It’s not information, but sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference if you don’t have the time or the background to look into it.
So, AnthonyElite, it’s easy to see why it might be a bit confusing, but it’s not nearly as hard to figure out as it looks. Go with the experts. The WHO, the FDA, the CDC, the AAP, pretty much all the people who do have the time and the background, agree that preventing disease with vaccination is much better than suffering through it.
Some have a highly developed suspicion/disdain of perceived authority figures, which leads them to distrust learned/expert views on everything from vaccines to the moon landings to 9/11. Others have libertarian leanings and want virtually nothing to be mandated by law. Others are what we would generally recognize as intelligent, but have never attained critical thinking skills sufficient to filter out bad arguments, half-truths, distortions and outright lies (which pervade antivax propaganda).
Posters have been patiently, reasonably, calmly discussing immunization here for eons. When the facts are persistently ignored and the same old foolishness is regurgitated over and over, some crankiness can be expected.
If your time is limited, best not to divide it equally between comprehensive, authoritative sources and utter loons.
The CDC and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia have excellent vaccine resource pages, including articles debunking common antivax myths and explaining the history behind immunization. More here.
Good that you’re planning to protect your kids through vaccination.
Great Antibob - I have too budged, I’ve already mentioned that I was misguided.
The honest truth was that I THOUGHT it was still open for debate. Now that I’ve seen some of the links and posts I am thoroughly convinced that vaccinations are worthwhile. My only caveat is that despite the overwhelming facts I STILL think it is important to have a skeptical mindset. Afterall…isn’t that why we are at the Dope?
For christ’s sake, before this thread I thought there was legitimate chance of autism because of vaccinations. Now that I’ve taken the time to read through it - weighing the evidence of people I perceive to be intelligent - I realize that it is one sided.
That being said, the answer isn’t bashing people over the head with the information.
This is The Pit. The OP was pitting the one person who is most responsible for an actual epidemic of vaccine-preventable disease. In this venue and with this target, ire is not only expected, it’s encouraged.
I think a lot of it is the Dread factor (part of the psychometric descriptionof risk assessment).
People are more afraid of nuclear power plants than coal power plants, despite the much greater historical harm of the latter.
People drive their kids to school to keep them “safer,” but riding on a school bus is actually much less risky.
People are more afraid of terrorism than they are of car accidents and heart attacks, despite the fact that they’re very very likely to die of one of the latter, and incredibly unlikely to die of the former.
People aren’t completely rational. They have understandable, gut reactions to vaccination (especially in an era with constant anti-vax fearmongering and low incidence of VPDs). The problem is that people have come to believe that their gut reactions are somehow better evidence than evidence procured through a systematic process specially designed to filter out biases and mistakes and to self-correct over time.
I hear you. It can be easy to be fooled even when you have skin in the game and make a good-faith effort to get the facts. I think a lot of it depends on who you hang out with and what side you hear first. It’s fine to be confused or misled, as long as you don’t willfully resist clear evidence when it’s presented!
So when you said earlier that you were well-read but just didn’t understand, were you lying then or are you lying now? What changed between now and then that this “new” reading is suddenly so much more convincing?
I only did it because the host of the show said she would have him on without me if I did not. I was afraid she would not know enough about the subject to fully confront the guy’s lies so I agreed.
Never again. He’s a fucking lunatic who is convinced to this day that a few minute power outage in my house wasn’t because the house is old and has old wiring but because I couldn’t answer one of his stupid questions about the measles vaccine. Which I did almost immediately. His daughter has diabetes and he needs someone and something to blame so he found it.
The problem with the anti-vax people is not necessarily that they are large in number. Upwards of 90% of parents will vaccinate, although about half will skip or delay at least one vaccine in the mistaken impression that will reduce the risk of a vaccine reaction. The problem is that they’re organized and everywhere. Ann Dashel, head of the vile anti-vax website, The Age of Autism, shows up every single time this issue pops up. Literally. She’s usually the first person to post when the issue is mentioned. She has some of the nastiest supporters I’ve ever run across.
Kolga and I have been repeatedly attacked by them because of the book we wrote. They assert that we are funded by the pharmaceutical companies who hired us to be ghost writers. That we are baby killers no better than Nazis. They’ve tried to get her fired and even wrote a ridiculous letter to our publisher about the book and our writing on this issue that full of lies.
Oh and that we’re mean and nasty.
I think far more needs to be done online to help confront them. They may not show up here very often. But they’re everywhere in the mainstream media and it is frustrating as hell to read the lies they repeat over and over and over again. You can’t bring up this issue online anywhere and not have one of them pop up complete with gish gallop and links to dozens of crazy websites.
I wish I could go to an NHS and get all my vaccines done. I hate being american, sometimes, with this crappy health care system we have.
I will need to get blood drawn for titers despite discussing it with the doctor and explaining my lack of vaccination records. All because I don’t have the name of my childhood doctor, who’s probably retired anyway and might have sent all the records to be shreddded by now.
So if I get seriously ill, and have to be hospitalized --then therefore acquire debt to my eyebrows. Hopefully I recover, and all the gods help me otherwise. I will be completely fucked.
I don’t know which is which - back then they were referred to as hard and soft when speaking of children.
There was no measles vaccine available when I was a little kid getting shots. I got three - smallpox, polio and I think diptheria.
I was speaking of just kids. I just find it curious that there is this big deal about vaccinating babies for things that didn’t seem to be regarded as problems when I was a kid.
I guess it depends on what you believe.
Don’t they still give rubella shots to women who intend to get pregnant? Or is the idea to eliminate rubella altogether?
I don’t remember a lot of talk about Hib meningitis when I was growing up, but then again I had other priorities. It was a pretty big deal to parents of affected kids.
“Invasive Hib disease occurs most often at three months to three years of age, peaking at six to seven months of age. The disease is uncommon after age five years.”
“Hib can cause a wide variety of serious infections, including pneumonia, severe throat swelling that makes breathing difficult (epiglottitis), and infections of blood, bones, joints, and the covering of the heart. Complications of Hib meningitis include blindness, deafness, mental retardation, learning disabilities, and death. About 5% of children (500 out of every 10,000) with Hib meningitis die despite antibiotic treatment.”
Both diseases are less of a big deal now, since they’ve been drastically curtailed by immunization.
Nobody sensible would disagree. However, it’s important to remember that skepticism must work both ways. Yes, you should question orthodoxy, but when one guy shows up claiming to have proven something new, you should question him too. It took 12 years for The Lancet to retract Wakefield’s original autism-link “study”, because they weren’t skeptical enough.
