Skeptical Raptor's Blog hunting pseudoscience in the internet jungle

Hey vaccine deniers–it’s just simple math

Updated 19 November 2014.

When dealing with those pushing pseudoscience, like the antivaccination cult, the most frustrating thing is that they tend to ignore and deny the most basic tenets of science. If denying the fact of gravity would further their goals of “proving” vaccines are neither effective nor safe, they would do so. For all I know, they have.

Sam Harris, who has a Ph.D. in neuroscience from UCLA (which is ironic), and is one of leading science philosophers of our generation, says this about those who cling to pseudoscience:

Water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. What if someone says, “Well, that’s not how I choose to think about water.”? All we can do is appeal to scientific values. And if he doesn’t share those values, the conversation is over. If someone doesn’t value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove they should value it? If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?

If the antivaccination movement didn’t lead to epidemics of long-gone diseases, which can harm and kill children, the conversation would be over. I would just put the vaccine deniers in the same group as evolution deniers (creationists) or gravity deniers (there has to be some, somewhere). I would mock their pseudoscience, and move on. Of course, their denialism does lead to deaths of children, so we have to do what is right, and stop their lies, misinformation and ignorance in every forum we can.

We have to appeal to scientific values, and despite the fact that antivaccination pushers don’t share those values, we must continue to try. I have gotten enough emails and comments from people that they have started to vaccinate because of what I have written, so maybe some child’s life is better because all of us who support vaccines are heard.

For some, mathematics is the foundation of all science. Biology is dependent upon chemistry which is dependent upon physics which is dependent upon mathematics. Of course, I’m oversimplifying the relationships between the various branches of basic science, but my own scientific education moved in roughly the direction of advanced mathematics through basic physics to organic and physical chemistry to biology, cell biology, biochemistry and physiology.

Without mathematics, the scientific method might not make sense, because it requires statistical analysis to find small changes or differences. Though it is long lost from my brain, advanced statistics was necessary in every analysis I performed in my science life. It allowed me to find biological changes with tiny amounts of a hormone or growth factor. I didn’t observe the changes directly, only through mathematical analysis did it become apparent.

All of those scary ingredients in the flu vaccine. Except, they're really not scary.

All of those scary ingredients in the flu vaccine. Except, they’re really not scary.

Above is a photo circulating around social networks that attempt to point out all of the scary ingredients in vaccines. Of course, if one has an understanding of A) basic human physiology, and B) basic mathematics, including how small numbers are really small, this photo with the scary ingredients highlighted would be laughable. Well, I do have and understanding of both, and this is laughable. I mean so laughable, it’s possible I pulled a muscle.

Let’s start with with first highlighted ingredient, formaldehyde. This simple bio-organic molecule is used in the purification of the vaccine (the last thing we want is contamination from viruses or bacteria)– 99.9% of which is removed during the final steps of manufacturing.

The package labeling does not include the amount of formaldehyde in the vaccines because it is so tiny, so minuscule, so veritably invisible, that the amount actually cannot be measured. It’s possible that there is actually no formaldehyde in solution, because it cannot be measured, but the chances are good there is some because the manufacturing process can’t dilute out the vaccine sufficiently to guarantee that every picogram (that’s one trillionth of a gram) is removed, because it would dilute the vaccine’s antigen too.

But I can tell you where formaldehyde can be measure. The normal blood level of formaldehyde is 2.74 +/- 0.14 mg/L. A normal child has a blood volume of 2-3 L, so a normal child has 5-9 mg of formaldehyde floating in her blood, about 1,000,000X more than found in a dose of vaccine. Is that math clear? It would take probably 10-20 million doses of vaccines to just slightly increase the formaldehyde level in your child.

Now you might think “how did that evil formaldehyde get into my sweet child whom I feed organic foods, and don’t let them touch vaccines.” Well, not only do your math skills suck (let me remind the reader, 10 million doses of vaccines to measurably move the formaldehyde level–all at once), but so does your physiology knowledge. The body produces formaldehyde as a byproduct of metabolizing alcohols (not necessarily just from a beer, but the alcohol that is produced in the body and in other foods). And lots of foods contain formaldehyde, including fruits, nuts, and other yummy things.

In addition, formaldehyde is filtered from the blood rather quickly (since it is toxic), and its half-life, that is the average time one-half of the molecules of formaldehyde stay in the blood, is around 1 minute. It does not accumulate, so even if you got that 10-20 million doses of vaccines, the tiny amount of formaldehyde injected would be gone in 1-2 minutes. It is simple math.

Yes, formaldehyde is a carcinogen, it can cause cancer. However, the reference dose (that is the maximum daily dose over a lifetime that would be considered safe) for formaldehyde is around 0.2 mg/kg weight/day. In other words, an average child, let’s say 20 kg (about 48 lbs), could consume 4 mg of formaldehyde a day safely. Again, about 1 million times more formaldehyde than in a single dose of vaccines. And as far as I know, even amongst the most enthusiastic and ardent vaccine supporters, not one of them is demanding that we give children 1 million vaccinations. Every day. For the rest of their lives.

Once again, it is just the math.

Are we clear on this? The math doesn’t support the ludicrous claims that formaldehyde in vaccines is poisoning our children.

Thiomersal

So let’s move on to the other highlighted ingredients, and that’s the old canard, dangerous thiomersal (or thimerosal in the USA–my education is 100% US based, but for some reason I’ve used the non-USA spelling for 30 years). Let’s make some points clear right now. This is NOT mercury in its elemental form, which you might remember from old-style medical thermometers. So there isn’t a pool of mercury in the vaccine vial. Moreover, thiomersal is ONLY used, at least in vaccines, in multi-use vials, these days, only the flu vaccine.

Thiomersal is a toxic compound, there is no denying that. But let’s get back to math. The toxicity of compounds is measured through an analysis called the dose-response relationship, which describes the change in effect on an organism caused by differing doses of a compound after a certain exposure time. Table salt is tasty and safe in small amounts, but could kill you if taken in huge amounts. The dose-response relationship provides a graph that mathematically establishes what amounts of a compound causes what effects. This would seem to be a logical, and easily understood concept, but for many individuals, a bad substance is always bad.

First of all, the half-life of thiomersal in blood is around 2.2 days. That might seem long, but it means half is gone in a couple of days, cleared out by the kidneys. It does not accumulate.

But the math is even more telling. This flu vaccine, given once a year, has a maximum dose of 25 micrograms of mercury (but not elemental mercury). According to the thiomersal Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), the LD50, that is, the approximate dose at which 50% of organisms will die (in this case a mouse), is 5011 mg/kg body weight.

So, a 20 kg child would get 25 micrograms of non-elemental mercury in one injection once a year. The theoretical LD50 dose for that same child would be around 100 grams of thiomersal, or about 4 million times higher than the amount of thiomersal in one vaccine dose–if vaccines used in children actually had thiomersal, which it doesn’t.

So, you would have to inject your child 4 million times a day, every day, to make it potentially toxic. And no, dose-response relationships are not linear. That doesn’t mean that there’s some tiny risk of death from even a small dose of thiomersal–there is actually NO risk. And again, since there’s no thiomersal in pediatric vaccines this argument is ridiculous.

But more than all that, we have solid scientific data that show us that thiomersal is totally unrelated to autism, and is completely safe in vaccines. This illogical removal of thiomersal from vaccines makes it nearly impossible to have multi-use vials, so every vaccine has to be in a single-use prefilled syringe, which has rapidly driven up the costs of vaccines. Wait. That’s more evidence that antivaccination lunatics are in the pockets of Big Pharma. They pushed to get rid of thiomersal to make more profits for Big Pharma. That was an awesome move on their part.

So there it is. Simple math shows us that these are not dangerous toxins being injected into our kids. Sadly, simple math may not be in the list of skills of vaccine deniers.

More simple math problems for vaccine deniers in my follow up article.

 

Visit the Science-based Vaccine Search Engine.

 

Key citations:

Comments (177)
  • qqqjones

    The fair intelligent way to evaluate scientific claims is to fairly present all sides. Why should I listen to a partisan view of one scientific hypothesis, which is in effect claiming that this scientific camp is right and other scientific hypothesises are wrong, or don’t exist, or are so few that any dissenting view is not worth mentioning?

    Why the hell politicize scientific debate? A vaccination in and of its self might well be “safe.” That doesn’t address whether multiple vaccinations all given at the same time are equally safe, because of the faulty logic that one safe vaccine plus 5 safe vaccines must equal a safe single regimen of vaccines. Where’s you data and study on the interactions of multiple medicines.

    I just had a healthy, young cat die within two weeks of getting 3 vaccinations and a worm treatment. He checked out and was anemic from flea bites.

    Does that prove any one of the vaccinations were not safe? No, but then again the vet couldn’t tell me how 3 vaccinations, a particular worm treatment and a flea pill all interacted on an anemic cat. He was guessing, and instead of dividing up the medicine over a period time to adjust to the cat’s weakened state, preceded in a rush.

    So for a 100 dollar vet bill, I got a dead cat. Better than a dead child or an autistic child.

  • Dave

    Let me tell you a story of one of my experiences that made me a cynic. My wife and I brought our daughter in to our GP for a scheduled check-up when she was a baby. The Dr. at this visit informed us she was due for her Chicken Pox vaccine. We had some questions for her regarding said vaccination. When we questioned the vaccine we were told that this vaccination is (and I quote) “Absolutely imperative”

    So we set into discussing the vaccine and its implications with our GP. In the U.S. in 1995 before the vaccine was administered there was 11,000 patients administered into hospital due to chicken pox. Now I would imagine those admissions would range in severity, and age of patient (which is important). 100 of the visits resulted in death. That is a 0.0041% chance that chicken pox could lead to potential hospitalization and a 0.000038% chance that it could lead to death. Seems low.

    Why take that chance at all you ask? Well lets look at the vaccine first. How long does it last? “Best guess is 10 years” she tells us (which coincided with our research) but there’s a booster coming out soon that they believe will get 20 years of immunity. So that suggests we will have an immune compromised population in their 20’s and beyond. Now lets discuss the effects of the Chicken Pox virus on adults. Are we all aware of the effects Chicken Pox has on adults?

    http://www.cdc.gov/chickenpox/hcp/clinical-overview.html

    In healthy children, varicella is generally mild, with an itchy rash, malaise, and temperature up to 102°F for 2 to 3 days. Adults are at risk for more severe disease and have a higher incidence of complications.

    http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/chickenpox/basics/complications/con-20019025

    Chickenpox and pregnancy
    Other complications of chickenpox affect pregnant women. Chickenpox early in pregnancy can result in a variety of problems in a newborn, including low birth weight and birth defects, such as limb abnormalities. A greater threat to a baby occurs when the mother develops chickenpox in the week before birth. Then it can cause a serious, life-threatening infection in a newborn.

    Pregnant women you say? Such as those in their 20’s and beyond who now have no natural immunity? Birth defects? Death? Sounds like a ticking time bomb to me. Guess what our GP said at that time. And I quote. “Oh the jury’s still out on the Chicken Pox vaccine”. Seemed like quite the 180, in under 2 minutes.

    That day we switched GP’s, and started to do more research.

    Now I am of the belief that there’s not more than a handful of 20+ year olds that will have a vaccine booster alert programmed into their cell phones. Rather we will have a group of individuals preoccupied with education, new careers, and potentially starting families.

    The moral of the story? Are we not potentially over vaccinating? When you look back in history when humans have tried to change the course of nature, it has routinely come back to bite us in the ass. Look if you will at antibiotics. What a great thing it has done for the human race. Look at us now – over prescribing and it is losing its effectiveness. We have moved into the world of super bugs that antibiotics no longer manage. These are my concerns.

    • Dave

      For instance, among children 1–14 years of age, the fatality rate of varicella is approximately 1 per 100,000 cases, among persons 15–19 years, it is 2.7 per 100,000 cases, and among adults 30–49 years of age, 25.2 per 100,000 cases. Adults account for only 5% of reported cases of varicella but approximately 35% of mortality.

      http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/varicella.pdf

  • http://mikeblyth.blogspot.com/ Mike Blyth

    I completely support your conclusions, but I think there a couple of errors in the math. First, if the LD50 of thimersol is 5011 mg/kg as you say, then the LD50 for a for a 20 kg child would be 100 g, not 10 g. That represents 4 million doses of vaccine (not 400,000), but as a single dose, not 4 million doses a day for a year.

    A second problem with your argument is that you are using the LD50 and extrapolating to any kind of harm. There is no necessary connection between LD50 and harm in general. The LD50 describes the dose required to kill half the subjects with an acute dose, but there may be substantial risks with smaller doses through mechanisms that are unrelated to the those causing acute, fatal injury. For example, the LD50 of asbestos or plutonium might be fairly high, but that does not mean that much smaller doses are devoid of risk.

    As I said, I completely support the main point of your argument, which is that the minuscule amounts of these substances in vaccines are known to be safe. I just think that in making that point we need to make our analysis as denial-proof as possible.

    • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

      I’ll fix that error.

      LD50 is a good point because we simply cannot do experiments on children, despite the lies of the antivaccine lunatics. The fact is we don’t get close to 4 million doses. Moreover, toxicity is dependent upon dose-response, which isn’t some imaginary straight line from 0 to death. And we have that information based on numerous clinical trials.

      I fully understand LD50. But I clearly discussed dose response.

  • Dave

    Here’s another interesting piece of mathematical information. If you look at disease rates over a longer period of time, you’ll notice that they were steadily falling long before vaccines were introduced. Could better sanitation perhaps be a contributing factor to the decline of disease in developed countries? Here’s a great chart that sheds some interesting light.

    http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Vaccination-and-Renal-Patients-vaccine-mortality-rates-graph.gif

    • http://mikeblyth.blogspot.com/ Mike Blyth

      I don’t think anyone is claiming that the mass reduction in death rates in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was due to immunization. You are correct to suggest that sanitation (as well as improved nutrition) played a major role. The impact of immunization was a kind of second wave. If you study the kinds of diseases prevented by sanitation and by immunization, you will see that they are largely different, so both approaches were important in improving world health. For example, typhoid and cholera are diseases of poor sanitation, while measles and pertussis are unrelated to sanitation and can’t be reduced simply by improving the environment.

      • Dave

        Hey Mike, just curious if you listened to the link I posted below? You seem to be an open minded, educated individual and I’d be interested to hear your take on what Suzanne Humphries has to say. Here’s the link again in the event you missed it the first time.

        • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

          Bring peer reviewed articles published in high impact journals or STFU. A youtube video supports the level of your intellect–you can’t read apparently.

          • Dave

            And your manners are somewhat lacking. I asked someone with intelligence and knowledge on the subject to refute the science so we could have a discussion. I didn’t ask for an ignoramus to bully me. Unfortunately with such retorts I fear you’ll perhaps lose some credit here Raptor, and be known as someone who backs their ideas with anger when they are challenged. Good work mate, you’ve won me over… I’m now a believer.

            So getting back to the topic at hand… and yes Raptor, I’m giving Mike, and I suppose yourself a chance to turn me into a believer. I have gone so far as to offer an argument and then requested that you challenge that argument with one of your own. Lets have a discussion about the very topic that you’ve started, or shall we just call it at “You win because you’re the bigger bully” and I’ll move on to a different, more open minded forum where perhaps someone can argue these points better than you?

            I’m looking for information…. can you provide it?

          • Lawrence McNamara
          • Dave

            Well that’s pretty typical. I’ve seen this debating tactic before. If you can’t win the argument, you attack character. I ask again, have either of you even listened to the entire audio clip? Lets talk about what she says, not what others say about her character.

          • Lawrence McNamara

            Dave – she’s a lunatic & doesn’t even understand basic scientific principles….I don’t take scientific advice from a woman who believes in “magic water.”

          • Dave

            Sorry, define “Magic Water”. And again I ask the question, did you listen to the entire clip?

          • Lawrence McNamara

            If you don’t know anything about Homeopathy, I would recommend:

            http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/homeo.html

            Which tells you everything you need to know about the “science” espoused by that woman.

          • Dave

            Ok ok I secede. Although I do strongly believe Suzanne Humphries has strayed from conventional medicine because she believes it to be failing us. I also believe she makes some very strong points in her interview that could be listened to and explored. But if you cannot see past her choices and listen to what she has to say then we should move on.

            Read this article of an interview with Dr Tetyana Obukhanych.
            She is a PhD Immunologist who echoes some of the sentiment of Dr. Suzanne Humphries. There are a few other articles by her and others, and some videos as well I could share.

            http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2012/06/13/interview-with-phd-immunologist-dr-tetyana-obukhanych-by-catherine-frompovich/

            The point these people are trying to make is that we know so little about the immune system. We also keep seeing outbreaks of disease in immunized communities. As age goes up, so does the rate of infection. To say that immunization is the cure all end all I think is ignorant. Then when people challenge your stance it is met with anger and aggression (not you Lawrence, thanks for the level replies).

            Unfortunately the anti vaccine movement is relatively new, and not so unlike the French Resistance it is forced to meet in bars and back alleys. The money just simply isn’t there for the research and only now are prominent Dr’s. starting to step forward and speak out about the lack of science revolving around immunity and the immune system.

            I really do wish that people were given the right to chose without being chastised by the bigger, stronger movement. (insert French Resistance metaphor here).

          • Lawrence McNamara

            @Dave – #1 The anti-vaccine movement is not “new.” People were against the Smallpox vaccine because they believed it was going to turn them into a cow (so it is a couple of hundred years old at this point).

            After reading your link, the person being interviewed makes some very erroneous statements – such as the belief that the immunity conferred by vaccines is different than natural immunity, which is patently false.

            The breakdown of the “myths” propagated by this so-called “expert” can be found here:

            http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/why-does-this-immunologist-reject-vaccinations/

            If you think the research “hasn’t be done” perhaps you should actually read the literature and go through the thousands of studies that have been conducted over the past 100 years……and stay away from notorious anti-vaccine websites for your information.

          • Dave

            That link was a good read Lawrence. Thank you very much for engaging this discussion and for having thought out responses. It is a difficult one to regurgitate for most, and trying to cut through the fat of this argument is a challenge.

            The comment section of that blog was full of good responses all the while holding back on the name calling and condemning people to jail or hell.

            Let me do some more reading on things as I still have more questions that I’d like answered and you seem good at providing the perspective I need.

            See Raptor? You don’t need to tell people they can’t read, and that they’re fucking twits, or that they should shut the fuck up and go to jail to win an argument. Don’t they say “Kill em with kindness”?

            Hope to chat more Lawrence.

          • Star Harris

            file:///C:/Users/student.LC15/Documents/En112/vaccines/The%20Case%20Against%20Immunizations%20-%20Doctors%20Speak%20-%20General%20Issues%20-%20About%20Vaccines%20-%20Vaccination%20Risk%20Awareness%20Network.html

          • Star Harris

            I think you’ll like this :)

    • Lila Vinçot-Abiven

      There is a big problem with the graph you presented here : it is not on incidence rates (I suppose it is what you mean by “disease rate” ?).

      It’s on mortality rates. Meaning that, yes, as medical care advances, we have more means to keep sick people alive (and sanitation is part of this, since it helps prevent secondary infections). However, this type of graph doesn’t inform us about diseases complications.

      So it doesn’t really adress the original question : do vaccines have an effect on incidence rates ?

      Here is an article which explain this in more details : http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/vaccines-didnt-save-us-intellectual-dishonesty-at-its-most-naked/

      • Dave

        Yeah I’ve read all this in the past and have found all the same arguments. The CDC shows charts that start 15 years before vaccines were introduced in a number of occasions. Unfortunately (which is how the argument goes) this doesn’t really show a big enough picture. You’ll notice many of the anti vaccine perspective charts start anywhere from the 1850’s to the early 1900’s. That’s the argument they’re making, which your post doesn’t touch base on but only shows the CDC charts again.

        On the other hand he points out the direct link between nations vaccinating rates dropping and incident rates rising. He points out the direct correlation which to me seems quite valid.

        Good article, thanks.

        • Lila Vinçot-Abiven

          Ok, but what do these charts from the 1850’s talk about ? Mortality or incidence or morbidity ? That’s a pretty important detail.

  • John Robertson
    • Dave

      Interesting…..

      http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001269.pub5/abstract

      We included 90 reports containing 116 data sets; among these 69 were clinical trials of over 70,000 people, 27 were comparative cohort studies (about eight million people) and 20 were case-control studies (nearly 25,000 people).

      Key results

      The preventive effect of parenteral inactivated influenza vaccine on healthy adults is small: at least 40 people would need vaccination to avoid one ILI case (95% confidence interval (CI) 26 to 128) and 71 people would need vaccination to prevent one case of influenza (95% CI 64 to 80). Vaccination shows no appreciable effect on working days lost or hospitalisation.

      • John Robertson

        Yes, here is something else of interest from the Cochrane Database:

        Quality of the evidence

        The real impact
        of biases could not be determined for about 70% of the included studies
        (e.g. insufficient reporting details, very different scores among the
        items evaluated). About 20% of the included studies (mainly cohorts) had
        a high risk of bias. Just under 10% had good methodological quality.

    • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

      Tom Jefferson a biased, paid shill of the antivaccination cult. Seriously he, as opposed to the lies that most of us who are pro-science and pro-vaccine are Big Pharma Shills.

      Tom Jefferson is an incompetent researcher who had to hide in a mediocre Italian medical facility because he can’t get published. He filled his analysis with bias and eliminating data because it didn’t fit his pre-conceived conclusions.

      This is why you’re full of dumbassery, and a real skeptic, like me, kicks ass. Because I take nothing at face value.

      You’re too stupid and uneducated to actually critically analyze anything. So, STFU. Go away. Hope you end up in prison.

  • Dave

    Just one more thing…. and I know it’s a 30 minute audio file, but if you’re patient enough and are truly looking for an open minded argument, it’s a great listen. The key though is to listen to the whole thing….. and not just dismiss what is being said because it goes against what your GP tells you. There is ALWAYS two sides to every story. Please listen.

  • Dave

    Google “Vaccine Court” and you’ll find that there has actually been millions of dollars awarded to children who have suffered severe adverse effects due to vaccines in the U.S. alone. Most articles refer to side effects showing Autism like symptoms. I’d imagine the Drs and Judges that come to the conclusion of fault on behalf of the vaccine and its manufacturers would probably disagree with what is written in this article, and the oversimplified way it’s written. If you do some research into vaccines you will find that there is a very serious difference between having something floating in your blood stream, and injecting it directly into muscle (which is where most vaccines are administered). Direct injection into the muscle creates a much different response by your body then say eating a banana and obtaining said element orally. I think to sit here and compare apples to oranges and then say “See, told you so” is exactly the bad science that you are aiming to refute.

  • Dave

    If your kids are vaccinated, then why all the fear that an unvaccinated child is a threat? Are vaccines not effective, and if they are, is your child not protected? I’m a little confused by some of the outright fear and malice projected on this thread. Maybe we should let people have their own opinions and do what they feel right for their families?

    • Facepalm

      They are a threat to children too young to be vaccinated, you fucking twit. What’s that, you’re carrying poliomyelitis? Well, here, carry my two month old baby! After all, there’s no risk from unvaccinated morons carrying fatal diseases…

      • Andrew Gibson

        ^^^^ Everything this person said. Dave, that is the whole point of this article. This isn’t an issue on opinions, these are facts. Doing what is right for families is literally laid out in front of you with scientific data to back it up.

        • Dave

          Yes but there is also another side to this story, which for some reason is not only ignored, but is met with anger and fear. Please read some of my other posts and we can talk about clear facts, if there are any in this argument.

      • Dave

        Yup. Hear that. But Poliomyelitis is only endemic in 3 countries in the world. So I’d say the odds of contracting that are basically slim to none. The Vaccine Court paid out millions in damages to hundreds of victims within a 3 month period in the U.S. alone! Two of those cases are for Autism. I guess if life is full of risk, and our role as a parent is to mitigate that risk for our children, then I’ll go with the 0 risk as oppose to the obvious and court recognized.

        That is hundreds of payouts in a three month period. Bear in mind those are the payouts. There’s is probably thousands more who have no made the connection between the vaccine and their childs issues, or have bought into the anger and fear perpetuated by articles such as this.

        But obviously I’m a fucking twit and have done no reading on the subject so what do I know?

    • Xitwa

      People are are not vaccinated for non-health related reasons endanger those who can’t be vaccinated – those who are too young, those who are allergic to the vaccinations’ ingredients, and those with compromised immune systems. People who have health/age related reasons for not receiving vaccines rely on ‘herd immunity’ of society around them. When people choose not to vaccinate for illogical reasons not based on facts, it endangers those people.

      • Dave

        Read my reply below. The fact of the matter is there is no such thing as non-health related reasons for not vaccinating. If the courts are paying out millions to children and their families for being effected by vaccines, then I’d say that’s a very solid health related reason to not vaccinate. We cannot argue with the fact that Dr’s, lawyers, and judges are siding with effected families and reimbursing them for the impact vaccines have made on their lives.

        Again my point is that parents should have the right to chose without being bullied by people who buy into everything their GP tells them.

  • karen

    http://yournewswire.com/johns-hopkins-scientist-reveals-shocking-report-on-flu-vaccines/
    I find this post funny and arrogant. Major nail polish companies have removed formaldehyde from their products and yet you are trying to convince us through mathematics it’s safe. A FACT remains it’s not good for us. Fact…Autism has increased over the years. Unless you know for 100 percent certainty the cause. Your math skills will not convince me that we benefit from the vaccinations.

    • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

      Quit eating pears and apples. Shut down your liver after drinking. All of those things produce more formaldehyde than you could ever get from a vaccine.

      Do you really enjoy being an ignorant individual? Sad really.

  • Ben Lawson

    Maybe it’s like homeopathy – the less there is the greater the effect!?!?!?!?!?!

  • Joseph Kerr

    Some of these comments make me wish we had a minimum IQ requirement in order to use the internet. Knee-jerk populist anti-intellectualism is taking over.

  • John Treadwell

    I actually sympathize with the anti-vaxxers to a point, since being a bunch of stupid social animals that can’t do anything for themselves, and have to band together just to survive, and being forced to exist in this world through birth and an instinctive fear of death that can only be removed through severe mental illness, being born unable to be given an informed decision on the subject of vaccines, being born an ignorant helpless creature, bossed around by people three times your size just because “it’s just the way it is.” And “we’ve been around longer therefore we’re allowed.” That all sucks, and ultimately they’re making a ill reasoned decision to try and give more freedom to choose to their kids. But the choices here are between forcing your kid to have a shot, and potentially forcing someone else’s kid to have some horrific disease. It’s shitty, but that’s because the world is big giant parasite that constantly feeds on itself as numerous lives suffer and die only to create the next generation of lives to suffer and die. Vaccines are almost always harmless so they clearly seem like the lesser evil here.

  • Sarah

    You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. No matter how educated, how thoughtful, how undeniably correct any information is, if someone chooses not to believe it, they won’t. I’m convinced at this point that anti-vaxxers will remain blinded by their own ignorance no matter what evidence is presented to them.

  • lovingmom3

    Why is it the pro vaxxers are so often rude and say such hateful things to the people who disagree with them? I’m not anti vaccination but I find it disgusting how you people treat other parents who are just trying their best to research and make informed decisions in regards to their children’s healthcare. Calling people names and attacking them online simply makes you a bully and does nothing to help them see your point of view.

    • William Richardson

      It’s stated in the first part of the article. If you spoke to someone who confided in you that they routinely drove drunk through school zones, would you be upset with them, or would you respect their opinion that driving drunk was in fact beneficial to children? I’m inclined to think you’d probably have a few harsh words for them, and perhaps report them to the authorities. Again, it’s pretty simple: people who understand vaccination don’t behave that way because they are bullies who don’t respect others’ right to have a different opinion. They respond that way because anti-vaxxers’ ignorance is actually killing an increasing number of children every year. It’s dangerous, irresponsible, and it kills children. Pretty simple really. Nobody gets to have their opinion respected whose opinion is harming others. It’s just not a thing.

      • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

        I should be nicer. But anti-vaxxers are intentionally trying to harm children, more than just their own, but the whole community. They are narcissistic and lack an intellect that I think rational people have.

        I love the metaphor about drunk driving. I don’t particularly like drunk drivers either. :)

      • qqqjones

        Pretty simple really.

        Not at all. Introducing politically correctness to a scientific debate is scary as hell.

        So what if you are wrong, cowboy? What if down the road its discovered, that some chemical in a vaccine which was supposed to be safe, was not safe, because some contractor was substituting inferior ingredients to make a larger profit, and the purity inspectors weren’t doing their jobs?

        Now what? Now who is killing kids? You are.

        • William Richardson

          First: Don’t call me cowboy.

          What does “politically correctness” have to do with science? I’m so tired of being confused by the confusion of people who have no idea what’s happening around them. My analogy here has absolutely sweet FA to do with political correctness, but I guess if all you have is a hammer everything starts to look like a nail.

          “What if I’m wrong?” I’m confused by this as well. Have you ever heard of Ockham’s Razor? What you’ve done here is you’ve taken an actual, simple thing that’s happening and you’ve added so many unnecessary entities that it’s actually no longer what was being discussed. It’s actually a totally different thing now.

          To say nothing of the fact that it demonstrates that you have absolutely no idea how the vaccines discussed in the original post are made, or how they’re regulated. If the way they are made and regulated happened in a way where what you’re describing was even remotely possible, then *of course*, I would immediately concede that I, ‘cowboy’ that I am, might be mistaken.

          I’m probably not the first person to say this to you, and I’m pretty sure I won’t be the last: You really need some science education. That’s not political correctness, it’s just a simple request for you to acknowledge your innumeracy. ‘substituting inferior ingredients?’ ‘purity inspectors?’ What planet are you from?

          Yes. If you put poison in things because you have bad intentions based on a profit incentive, and if some train of bad things involving inspectors with, I dunno, Erlenmyer flasks and tubes and blue and red dyed liquids and bunsen burners (you know, science) happens, then sure, poison and all that. That’s not what’s happening here.

          What’s happening here is that actual kids are actually dying because perfectly safe, carefully tested vaccines aren’t being used by people who, like you, have no idea what they’re talking about.

          I didn’t have to make up some convoluted scheme in order to produce the current, fatal results. You had to make a cockamamie scheme up in order to pin imaginary future deaths on people who are doing hard work saving the children who are being vaccinated. Cowboy.

    • valerie

      because they are clearly idiots and need to be spoken to like that. they need to be bullied.

    • Dee

      Name calling and rudeness? Last I checked, pointing out solid facts is not being a big bad meanie. Maybe its not considered polite, but fact trumps opinion and even the “sensitive emotions” some people may have behind those opinions. Also, this is a lot nicer than some other reports, including those from the anti-vaccine side. They too have no problem insulting science proving their views wrong, slandering people on the autism spectrum (like me) and using us as pathetic dehumanized entities to support their idea that being “afflicted” with our brain type is worse than a completely preventable death (even though vaccines do not create our brain type). Plus, unlike this side of the argument, the anti-vaccine movement endangers the lives of innocent children. Personally, I think the life and well-being of a child out weighs an adult’s “sensitivity” about being called out on their ignorance.

      • qqqjones

        I went to an Autism march in a small rural town in the South. Must have been about 200 mothers there in a county of about 3,000 people.

        I walked around and talked to the different mothers with autistic children. Nearly everyone said their child was developing normally until the child got vaccinated.

        So what is going on? When I grew up, I never met an autistic child. Now its what? Its epidemic. So why? You pro vaccinations don’t know. You are just positive it has nothing to do with vaccinations, when all the direct anecdotal evidence from mothers suggest indeed it is the vaccinations or something which has been added over the years to vaccinations or the increased number of vaccinations.

        • William Richardson

          Anecdotal evidence is *not* evidence. It is not ‘epidemic’ (if it were, the word you’re looking for is ‘endemic,’ by the way). What you need to do is, instead of looking at anecdotal evidence, which is not used for a reason (not the least reasons being small selection size, selection bias, and availability heuristic), you need to examine the careful controlled studies that have been done. They have all concluded that (while it *can* seem that way when you examine things anecdotally, which doesn’t give reliable results, for heaven’s sake), there is no more autism among vaccinated kids than unvaccinated kids. Anti-vaxxers keep asking *why*. Well, the only reliable way to find out *why* is to do careful, scientific studies. The studies are being done all the time, and they disprove what you want to hear.

          It seems to me, when you say ‘you pro-vaxxers don’t know,’ what you’re really saying is, ‘the scientific community refuses to provide me with the answer I want and keeps instead coming up with the facts, which I disagree with because they don’t hew to what I want to hear.’ Eventually, you’re going to have to realize that kids are dying, that we developed vaccines for a reason, and that you don’t understand how any of this works.

          If you’re seeing a rural community with a high incidence of autism, then the first thing you need to do is find out what the numbers really are. You can’t do that ‘anecdotally’. You have to survey the community. You have to examine the facts. You have to find out if that incidence is higher than the general population. Then, you have to eliminate variables. You’ve decided that it’s vaccines, but if this community is in fact experiencing higher than average rates of autism, you have to control for a whole range of things that might be causing that. What you’re doing is unscientific. That doesn’t mean ‘it’s not respectful to something I hold dear.’ ‘Unscientific’ means that it isn’t going to work. The only way you’ll find out what it actually happening is by being rigorous about your investigation. Otherwise, if you come to the right conclusion, it will be by *blind luck* and you won’t know why with any certainty.

          You also have to be ready to discover that, despite how worked up you got, and despite how concerned you were, you might have been wrong in the first place and the results might show that the rates are normal (though still sad and unfortunate), or that the causes were not what you expected.

          This is the humility demanded of people who want to know what’s really going on. You don’t wade into a community of motivated, well-meaning, capable people generating results through careful examination of processes and go ‘you don’t know what’s going on’. They’ll admit a margin for error (though they’ll likely be able to tell you what it is within a certain degree of accuracy), and then they’ll explain to you what’s happening, and if you’re not acting with rigor and care in your examination, you might make the mistake of dismissing what they’re saying because it doesn’t support your assumptions. That’s what’s getting kids killed right now.

          • qqqjones

            Anecdotal evidence is *not* evidence.

            Perhaps not. But the young mothers I talked to are not in the science business. They are in the mothering business.
            They know first, that there is one chance in 65 births that their child will be born autistic.

            Second, most understand that autism was virtually non existent a few decades
            ago. Autism rates in 1970 were around one in 25,000

            So essentially your argument is we don’t know why autism rates have gone up so drastically in the last 40 years. But we don’t have enough evidence to conclude it has anything to do with vaccinations, their formulations, purity or expanded use, etc.

            But we are working on it.

            The problem is while you are working on it, babies are still being born at
            an alarming rate with autism. So in the midst of medicine’s complete
            failure to either discover the cause of autism, or cure it. Its hardly
            surprising that prospective mothers are erroring on the side of caution
            in regard to vaccinations.

            Especially since big pharm company are no longer legally responsible for their products and no one is going to ever give one of those mothers of an autistic child a 2 million dollar
            check for care, and damages.

            You should learn empathy for people when you have no skin in the game. If you believe what you say about vaccinations and you are a prospective parent and know from the get go
            that there is a 1in 65 chance you child will be born autistic and caring for that child will forever alter your life, then go for it. Then you have skin in the game.

          • William Richardson

            This is infuriating. You either disn’t read what I said, or you didn’t understand it. You simply cannot jump to conclusions. There is absolutely no evidence that vaccines are causing autism, but overwhelming evidence that not vaccinating children is killing more than just the kids that aren’t getting vaccinated. This is whatvis happening. You simply can’t make the argument that in order to be compassionate to parents who have an irrational fear of vaccines, you must, to be nice to them, jump to the parently false conclusion that vaccines are a cause, and that not vaccinating doesn’t have real, immediate, often fatal consequences. It’s infuriating that you would argue that in all seriousness. Everything else you wrote was, if that’s possible, even more inane. It’s not even worth responding to this claptrap.

          • qqqjones

            You can be infuriated all you want. The fact is the third largest cause of death in the US is doctor and health care system fuck ups.

            Sorry, if i pissed on your entitlement to be treated like an infalliable god because you have a science degree. Let’s look at these examples.

            12,000 deaths per year due to
            unnecessary surgery

            7000 deaths per year due to medication errors in hospitals

            20,000 deaths per year due to other
            errors in hospitals

            80,000 deaths per
            year due to infections in hospitals

            106,000 deaths per year due to negative effects of drugs

            What does that tell anyone with an ounce of common sense? It tells them to be responsible for their own health, diet and exercise, and avoid like your life depended on it, any unnecessary medication, surgery or visits to a hospital.

            Because your overworked and too busy to give a shit doctors will likely kill your ass following standard, accepted protocol and then seek protection for his professional fuck ups from an army of attorneys and insurance companies.

            But you will still be dead. Dead is like forever.

            That is why people don’t trust information on vaccinations, because the health care business is still a business and if you take health care advise and it kills you, you are just a statistic.

          • William Richardson

            This is some deeply flawed and deeply paranoid thinking. It’s time for a little remedial instruction before I opt out of this conversation. The longer this goes on without any potential for resolution, the less and less I want to play pigeon chess.

            First mistake you’re making here is in assumptions. You don’t know the first thing about me, about what ‘privilege’ might or might not be ‘pissed on’ be people not treating my explanations with the basic respect a reasonable argument deserves. You don’t know what degree(s) I might or might not have. You don’t know if I have ‘skin in the game.’ You don’t know what motivates me to argue with random paranoids on the internet (aside from, in this case, the idea that changing one mind might save lives). You have, in fact, not the slightest idea who I am, but you’ve assumed a lot of things, and as a result you’re arguing with a straw man you’ve propped up to aim your bizarre, paranoid (and as far as anti-vaccine positions go, dangerous) opinions at.

            Science is, at its root, simply a toolset. It’s not a conspiracy of elitists, a bloc of superior, self-righteous jerks who won’t let you in unless you speak their language. It’s just a word for a certain kind of mental discipline; you don’t jump to conclusions, and you’re very careful about how you gather information, and about how you carry out things that you (and the giants whose shoulders you’re standing on) have decided are procedures that work.

            That said, yeah, there are a lot of people who are bad at it. Human beings are flawed, often deeply so. Bureaucracies and systems get complicated and can sometimes make it harder to do things well. Also, many people are jerks.

            What you’re doing by quoting malpractice statistics (presumably from the US?) at me is pointing out a basic, simply assumption that a reasonable person makes about science and medicine: like any field of human endeavour, it takes care to get it right. Some people are better at things than others, and yes, you do have to guide your own health to a great extent. You have to be capable of using careful decision making to navigate a complex system.

            For my part, I think what you’re talking about there simply goes without saying. I and the rest of the reasonable people assume it as the state of affairs we have to live in and go from there, working with others to improve it where we can. What I don’t do is throw the baby out with the bathwater, because if you reject it, and then you decide that ‘science’ (you and I don’t mean the same thing when we use that word.) is just a bunch of elitists telling hapless people what to do, then you don’t have the toolset for arriving at reality that it offers.

            It doesn’t *matter* that mothers aren’t ‘in the science business,’ though that’s a puzzling thing to say, because they are. You went from there into a scientific analysis (a sloppy one based on false assumptions, but bad science is still science) of what those mothers are thinking and why they choose a flawed and dangerous course from the data they have. I say it doesn’t matter, because when you want to find out what’s *actually* happening, there’s very limited room for assumptions, anecdotes, jumping to conclusions, or appeasing the feelings of people who would pressure you to base a decision based on bad information they’ve put together because they don’t know what’s going on. The costs in the long term are *higher* if you get it wrong.

            If you assume (as you have) that it’s vaccines, you miss the real causes (which are actually almost entirely historical misclassification, reclassification, misdiagnosis, greater recognition of symptoms as the profile of the spectrum rises, and the increased reporting that has come with the recent, dramatic changes in the medical field and in the media). It’s *dangerous* to do this.

            Science is often hard. It often requires specialized knowledge. It often goes awry, and many people do it badly. Unfortunately, if you throw the baby out with the bathwater and assume it’s all fucked, then you get that right back, because using it isn’t perfect, but it’s better than the alternative, which is no better than random guessing.

            What you’re advocating here is going into a dark room to find something and then refusing to use the flashlight you’re carrying. Sure, the flashlight doesn’t show you the whole room, it just casts a beam, so you might still stub your toe. But you can’t blame that on the flashlight, because if you turn it off, you’re going to walk into walls.

            Anyway, I’m out. There’s no discussion here. Just another paranoid who, unlike a moon-landing denier or a UFO believer, is actually not harmless like they are, because lives stand in the balance when it comes to medical technology, but isn’t any more capable of seeing other points of view. Sad.

          • qqqjones

            ROTF! Oh, you can really stretch credulity.

            Its stands to reason, if you are arguing from authority without giving a fair hearing for all sides of the question, that your position is partisan.

            Unfortunately for people who argue from authority, the internet now has near instant counter points from scientists ready to argue that vaccinations are not all medicine pretends they are.

            So why should I argue with a malcontent on the internet, when these credentialed scientists and doctors are more than willing to make my case, with no strain on my part, and you clearly avoiding the debate?

        • Dee

          Wow, 200 mothers at one autism walk claim their kids were completely normal before vaccinations and you “never met” anyone with autism when you were a kid so vaccines must cause it, really? Aside from the fact that this is not a study thus not actual evidence and 200 is a pretty small sample size for making such claims; your arguments are flawed. For starters, development is varied before age 18 months to 3 years so there is no firm “normal development”, especially that which could easily pinpoint autism, to follow, just estimates for a some of the major developmental milestones that many on the autism spectrum easily meet. Most of the development before this time is also not social development which is where our core deficits are. Also, these same kind of “anecdotal evidence” you get from the claims of mothers blaming vaccines is the same as from mothers who didn’t vaccinate their kids and also have autistic kids. The age where the symptoms of autism become apparent is the same in both vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, and with the same rates of seemingly normal development before this and/or regression reported in both population (if vaccines were the cause this would not be found equally in unvaccinated groups as the vaccinated groups). Then there is your claim that you never met anyone with autism when you were a kid. It is quite possible that you did know people with autism but were not aware of it. Most of the increase is in the higher and extremely low ends of the spectrum who largely went undiagnosed for decades. Many of the new high functioning cases are even adults who were just seen as shy or eccentric growing up. Then there was the false belief that if you were autistic you could have no comorbidities (which are very common) so many were not diagnosed because they were epileptic, had mild MR, were dyslexic or any number of things (many adults were re-diagnosed in the past 20 years because they now know this to be false so that too adds to the increase). There is also the way disorders have been treated. It is only relatively recently that they were “seen” except in rare cases. Most families hide that their were anyone disabled in their family; this was especially true of mental and/or neurological disorders. Autism was especially hidden if it could be because of the stigma against the family, particularly the mother, which dominated views on Autism through the 1980s. This was largely fueled by Bettlehiem’s misuse of terms taken out of context from Kanner’s work and of outdated Freudian theory while rejecting any scientific evidence countering his views (he would even engage in personal attacks against any who disagreed with him about Autism not being caused by maternal abuse/neglect which dominated the autism field for decades. Some of this even continues to linger today. Thus, it should come as no surprise that many people would hide a diagnosis, not seek one if they recognized any of the signs or refuse to acknowledge one because they knew that they weren’t abusive/neglectful and thus believed it wasn’t possible to have an autistic child. Not as many doctors could identify the disorder as today and if the child was high enough functioning to pass as “normal” just a bit odd, they didn’t seek diagnostic testing for them too often. The increase itself is also an issue. To date there have been no incidence studies done for ASDs (to officially chart an increase fully accurately one needs to compare incidence studies form different times) and prevalence studies only go back to maybe the 1980s (which is where the estimated increase rates come from) before that they just assumed it had to be rare and guessed possible rates. In the cases of the estimated rates of increase from the start of prevalence studies their does appear to be a clear rise in diagnosis (which is not necessarily the same thing as an increase in cases). Most of this can be accounted for with better diagnosis and such and the margin of error could easily account for the rest. There are other things that have a similar increase rate profile (like men who where baseball caps) that clearly are not a cause, so there is no reason to assume that the increase in vaccines (whose rates actually differ from those of the estimated rise in autism) do either. Co-existence does not prove causation. I know Autism is not caused by vaccines because there have been hundreds of scientific studies of hundreds of thousands of children which prove it doesn’t. I believe the science, by those trained in science, over the opinions of mothers who have an emotional need to blame something for their child’s brain type (and I’m not dissing mothers here nor their emotional ties to their children; this is a normal response) as to potential causes and things that are not causes. Further, there is far more evidence to the fact that vaccines do NOT cause autism, than there is anecdotal evidence (which is by definition an unreliable source of evidence anyway) suggesting a causative link between autism an vaccines. These are facts and they outweigh opinion.

          • qqqjones

            I know Autism is not caused by vaccines because there have been hundreds
            of scientific studies of hundreds of thousands of children which prove
            it doesn’t.

            100’s of studies? Really? Somehow I doubt this.

            So lets get this straight. You are not a medical doctor, not a scientist, but believe in science.

            So if I found actual medical doctors and degreed scientists that are making the case for a link between autism and vacinnations, I’d would be listening to people who are more qualified than you to make this assessment?

            Hmmm . . wouldn’t that make an interesting debate. A pasionate layperson and a degreed professional arguing about vacinnations.

          • Dee

            If you doubt it look it up. I would expect nothing less. If you found medical doctors that believed in this link I would listen to their reseach and check it along with that of doctors who don’t. (You will need to dig pretty hard to find medical doctors, autism researchers, psychiatrists etc. who support the anti-vax conspiracy on vaccines causing autism. Research soundly negates it; so, most people with a medical license oppose the view. You do have Dr. Wakefield but his paper was revoked for fraud and ethics concerns and his medical license suspended. Yes, I’ve read his paper, before it was proven to be fraudulent, and it does not take an “expert” to realize its crap, especially when you start checking the footnotes.) I’ve already read the literature from both sides of the argument as is required for proper research, but am always checking up on the latest autism research whenever I have the chance to do so. And, while none of my degrees are in medicine, I am more studied than an average lay person in this area. I’m a part of the autistic community and have done a lot of study in this field. I’ve also taken quite a few classes in it and attended workshops and seminars on the topic. {Just a few month back I had the opportunity to attend one of Dr. Attwood’s workshops (he is one of the leading experts on my brain-type in the world). But I degress here.} I just do so for personal interests not as a career goal. I do not want to be a medical doctor nor a neurologist or psychologist. Of course I “believe” in science. I “believe” facts. Science isn’t a matter of faith or belief, its a matter of what evidence supports. As for a debate, I wouldn’t even need to be involved since there are a
            plethora of more qualified individuals who would logically be consulted
            for such a thing. {And by more qualified I mean actual doctors and neurologists who specialize in this, not random moms at a random autism walk who have no background in either vaccines or autism but have fallen under the common logical fallacy that co-existence and causation are the same and were duped by the anti-vaccine crowd preying on their emotional need for answers.}

    • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

      YOU, as an antivaccine parent, are intentionally causing harm of your own children and others. Shall I treat such narcissism and abuse with civility?

      No. Maybe if you came here and said “I’m confused about the lies the anti-vaxxers are saying, can someone help me?”

      But instead, you buy into their lies and ignorance. You’re not even putting an effort into opening your mind, and just whine about how you and your cult are treated.

      Please, go troll someplace else. You’re not a “loving mom”. You want to harm children.

      • John

        I have to say, this raptor dude is a douche. His/her douchiness stems from his/her lonliness, quite clearly, by his/her high and mighty attitude. He/she sits at his computer pantsless and looks for people to put down in order to feel superior to others.

        • Chi

          His blog, his rules. No one is making you read it. And I don’t blame him if he’s getting sick of the anti-vaxx trolls. Their sheer arrogance in believing that they know more than doctors, simply because they have internet access is truly breathtaking and mind-blowing.

          • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

            Anti-vaxx trolls amuse me. Around 1% of the US population actually refuse vaccines for non-medical reasons, so talk about a lunatic minority. LOL

          • qqqjones

            By all means vaccinate your child. Oh, that’s right. You don’t have any children.

        • Dan

          Good job, Freud. Please fuck off with you amateur psycho analysis; your superiority complex is showing.

        • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

          It’s pretty cold right now, so if I were pants-less, I’d be freezing.

          I don’t feel superior. I sit on the moral and scientific high-ground, and you feel inferior because you’re incapable of reaching that same high ground. It takes education and critical thinking skills, which you sorely lack. But I do appreciate your pop-pseudo-psychology. You must have read that while in prison?

    • Chi

      It’s not just pro-vaxxers. A lot of anti-vaxxers are JUST as rude and often resort to ad hominem attacks simply when we ask for evidence of what they are saying. And just because they know someone’s sister’s uncles barber’s cousin’s roommate who was supposedly ‘vaccine injured’ they think that that is proof that vaccines are harmful, when there is plenty of science to the contrary.

      I’ve been called a shill. A child-abusing rapist (yes someone ACTUALLY said that me vaccinating my child was a form of rape), etc etc etc.

      I try to always be respectful when pointing out the flaws in someone’s argument, but when they repeatedly refuse to acknowledge the science and that they have no real logical argument they then often stoop to calling me a shill and saying that the science I provide is not acceptable because it has all been ‘paid for’ by the almighty “Big Pharma”.

      Also they then quote sites like mercola and I’m sorry, but he lives in a 2 million dollar house courtesy of the people who buy his ‘natural remedies’ (which I add do NOT have any peer reviewed science to back up whether or not they work, plus he has been under investigation for making claims about his products that have been proven fraudulent).

      So I’m sorry, but just because anti-vaxxers have an ‘opinion’ that does NOT give them the rights to spout misinformation and quackery in lieu of actual research done by actual scientists. Just because they can google, does not make them informed. It makes them self-righteous and selfish because they KNOWINGLY put not only their child in harm’s way, but other children and vulnerable members of the community as well. And I’m sorry, but to me that is unthinkable. No man is an island, everything we do has repercussions and not vaccinating is one that can have the biggest.

  • Calgary Mom

    Could you anti-vaxxers PLEASE stop using “Big Pharma” as an argument? Why is it that pharmaceutical companies are made out to be villains if they make money? EVERY business is in business to make money. Why is making money okay, say, in the case of growing organic vegetables, but not in making medications and vaccines that save lives, every day? If you actually look at the revenue that pharmaceutical companies make (and you can, if they are public companies – they have to produce annual reports with financials) and understand what a small part of their revenue that vaccine production makes up, you’d realize that argument is bunk.

    • notation

      Exactly. What these anti-vax zealots don’t seem to grasp is that if there were NO profit in vaccines, then the US pharmaceutical companies would stop manufacturing them, and we’d be forced to buy vaccines from China or India.

  • Pingback: TWiV 309: Ebola email()

  • Chardelle Penman

    This article is admitting to there being toxins in these vaccinations..
    Yeah, let’s ignore the fact we are injecting ourselves with things we shouldn’t, no problem, it’s all in the math…

    How does a mercury derivative make me healthy, and benefit our bodies?? How does formaldehyde benefit me if I inject myself or my child?? Sure, you can say it’s not harmful, but can you prove that we NEED it? Most people get more sick after being vaccinated…and enough people have grown up perfectly healthy, without vaccinations. My son wasn’t vaccinated as a baby, and he was never sick, compared to other kids who were sick all the time. He is smarter than any kid I know, and shows no signs of autism, or any other social/cognitive abnormality that I tend to see in other kids. There’s my proof first hand.

    We are stuck in a cycle of needing toxic chemicals to fight off unnatural viruses that are caused by OUR unnatural lifestyles. There has got to be a better way to prevent disease, and a better way to treat disease, than pumping people full of random harmful shit that may or may not work, and will most likely have adverse affects before being effective. I’d like to see the evidence that all these chemicals in our vaccinations are necessary and beneficial, before you start telling us not to worry about them due to your so called “math”.

    We all have a right to know and understand exactly everything in these vaccinations, and yet hardly anybody understands them at all.

    • thinkitover

      Have you ever bought bread at the grocery store and fed it
      to your child? It contains formaldehyde.
      The vegetables you feed your child are coated in poison and altered in
      their very genes. Have you ever taken your child to Subway? You have fed your
      child the same ingredients that are in the yoga mat you exercise on. Has your child ever had a pop? A piece of
      gum? Every day we feed our kids poison, years ago we didn’t know that, now
      every trip to the grocery store we stock up on food we know is modified past what
      our grandmothers would recognize as food. We bring that crud home and feed it
      to our families. Why? Because to avoid that we must either grow all our own
      food, mill our own flour, make our own bread and cheese and raise meat animals
      to slaughter ourselves or get up early on Saturday to go to the farmers market
      and take the time to get to know the folks who do all of that. We would have to
      spend our time and our money backing our position. Most people don’t. By
      contrast refusing to vaccinate a child requires no extra effort. In fact it
      means not having to go to the effort of keeping on top of the vaccine schedule
      or driving to the doctor to get the vaccination. I am not surprised that so
      many people choose to make a stand in the way that inconveniences them the
      least while blithely ignoring doing anything about the issues that require them
      to actually do something. What angers me is that while changing your shopping/eating
      habits has repercussions mostly for you and yours, refusing to vaccinate your
      child affects us all. We are seeing the effects of vaccine denial in the re-emergence
      of illness we thought we had beaten. So
      thank you to all those who take easy route to the high road, congratulating
      themselves the whole way. Thank you for your hypocrisy in endangering everyone
      else so you could feed your own image of yourself as a parent who cares without
      actually having to do anything positive.

    • notation

      Well, you surely don’t.

    • Dan

      Do you have selective reading or are you just really dumb? How can you possibly read that article and walk away with “HA! THEY ADMITTED VACCINES ARE DANGEROUS!”. You already know exactly what is in the vaccines. What the fuck do you think the ingredients label is for?

      I legitimately feel sorry for your children.

      • notation

        Bravo.

    • TheSA-X

      “We all have a right to know and understand exactly everything in these
      vaccinations, and yet hardly anybody understands them at all.”

      Really? REALLY? You think nobody understands them at all? I understand everything in these vaccinations *because I actually read the article.* Apparently you didn’t.

      Just because you don’t understand doesn’t mean no one else understands.

    • notation

      You are a moron. I just re-read your idiotic screed, and I’m embarrassed for you. And I’m embarrassed OF you. That you are THAT stupid and ignorant is a sad commentary on our educational system.

      You’re disgusting.

    • Vlad

      Instead of calling you an idiot, let’s look at each point you make individually.

      “How does a mercury derivative make me healthy, and benefit our bodies?” —>That’s a bit of a straw man, especially if you read the article (perhaps you did not). No one and especially not the author is suggesting that thimerosal is inherently going to make you healthy. Its purpose is to maintain the intended antigen in isolation without risking exposure to real pathogens. You know that but try to frame the argument in a way that supports your pre-formed views. The point of the article is that the dose is quite small and has been shown to be non-toxic in humans.

      “How does formaldehyde benefit me if I inject myself or my child?” —>Another straw man, and a moot one at that. Have you eaten an apple in your life? A banana? Almost any fruit, meat or dairy product? Then you’ve consumed or fed to your child a detectable amount of formaldehyde. This is naturally occurring, and would be present at the same levels in organic produce. You don’t complain about this because you would never know. However you want to discredit vaccination so you bring it up, but ignore the fact that there is many times less formaldehyde (practically none!) in a vaccine that you take once than in common everyday foods.

      “Most people get more sick after being vaccinated”–> You are pretty veritably wrong here. You wouldn’t cite anything for the first statement because you are making it up. Unless you mean sick as in the literal intended mechanism of vaccination, where the immune system adapts to an antigen incapable of true infection. The purpose of a vaccine is to prevent someone from getting truly sick- so where are you getting that information?

      “..and enough people have grown up perfectly healthy, without vaccinations.” –> Millions, perhaps billions of people died from preventable illness while those people you talk about just got lucky. This statement is insensitive to anyone who died of an illness that could have been prevented by a vaccine. Just because some people avoided being infected doesn’t mean that everyone doesn’t deserve to be protected.

      “My son wasn’t vaccinated as a baby, and he was never sick, compared to other kids who were sick all the time. He is smarter than any kid I know, and shows no signs of autism, or any other social/cognitive abnormality that I tend to see in other kids. There’s my proof first hand.” —> So you’re using one subjective and personal case to refute statistics dealing with millions of people. Face it- you just don’t want to believe it. Your son not getting sick is not evidence that vaccines are somehow bad. Guess what, I’ll never get polio. But your son could right now if vaccines had never existed. Boom. Proof they’re good. Next, are you seriously insinuating that every child other than yours is showing autistic signs? You nor I are qualified to make that diagnosis, and even if you were you’ll find the same proportion of autistic children in the non-vaccinated population as in the normal. Your sample size is tiny and your conclusions aren’t really valid.

      “We are stuck in a cycle of needing toxic chemicals to fight off unnatural viruses that are caused by OUR unnatural lifestyles.”—> Viruses are natural forms of life just like us. They’ve existed for longer than humans and are no affected by our lifestyles- unless you mean when we eradicate them with modern medicine. You pretty much just assume that anything “unnatural” – the definition of which you don’t even understand- is automatically bad. Did you know that part of the human genome is made up of the remnants of viruses that infected us? Viruses are anything but unnatural.

      “There has got to be a better way to prevent disease, and a better way to treat disease, than pumping people full of random harmful shit that may or may not work, and will most likely have adverse affects before being effective.” –> Again acting like we are gambling with modern medicine. The first thing you must to do even test a drug or vaccine on humans is to show that it is absolutely safe. It is not likely that a vaccine will have adverse effects and it is very likely that it will be effective. As a scientist, I hate to burst your bubble but there is not a better way to treat disease. I wish we could just eat an herb to prevent disease but the truth is if you want to go natural, you might die of tuberculosis. I’m pretty satisfied with the fact that again, I don’t have polio. And neither does anyone else. Seriously if you had your way people would be stricken with polio right now.

      “I’d like to see the evidence that all these chemicals in our vaccinations are necessary and beneficial, before you start telling us not to worry about them due to your so called “math”.” –> No you wouldn’t. You just read exactly what you asked for. Millions of doses of vaccines have been administered for many years and these chemicals have been very neccesary for them to work. Many people have been saved from illness due to these chemicals. You need to admit that you are just going to ignore proof from here on out because you have it. It just doesn’t fit the narrative that you already believe in. Also, the only people that put quotations around math are those that are afraid of it. No math here is questionable and it does not deserve to be treated like its some illegitimate rationale when you just don’t agree with it.

      And finally: “We all have a right to know and understand exactly everything in these vaccinations, and yet hardly anybody understands them at all.” –> You’re right that we have this right, but you’re wrong that nobody understands it. What you mean is you don’t understand it. And therefore you’re afraid. Just because you or your friends have never taken the time to educate yourselves does not mean that no one else has. I understand them. Doctors understand them.

      My final point, one more time. Without vaccines, people would still have polio and other terrible diseases. Without them, your child would have a great chance of being crippled or dead, because they’d still be around. Instead of being frightened of things you don’t understand, I encourage you to try to learn more. Please don’t erase the positive strides we’ve made towards eradicating human disease.

      • Calgary Mom

        What a wonderful, thoughtful response to someone who obviously doesn’t get it. Bravo!

      • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

        Excellent Vlad.

      • kellymbray

        Bravo!!!!

    • Rudi

      You are an idiot. Stop using words.

    • LongJohns454

      How long have vaccines been used? Cause it would seem to me that we have survived despite your ‘warnings of doom and gloom and the world will come to an end”. In fact the worlds population has only increased – how is this possible if we are injected with poison and killing ourselves. History is also full of VERY smart people who have been vaccinated yet you are still arguing the fact?

      There has also never been verifiable proof that vaccines cause autism – please post this verified scientific proof that shows this.

    • LNursey

      you are insane, go to a third world country and say that to someone who has no access to vaccines and people are dying of preventable diseases, they would ask for that vaccine in a heartbeat. And by not vaccinating your child you are putting other immune compromised children and pregnant women, etc at risk. Your child gets one of these diseases and then you need the cure which HELLO is probably fully of big names you can’t understand. When your child gets one of these diseases and you have to take them into emerge the nurse is going to look at you like you are from space and say ‘um didn’t you know you could prevent this’ Do some research, and keep your kids away from mine

      • Dee

        Some of these diseases don’t even have cures which would put her in an even more precarious situation should her son contract one.

    • joeymom

      I can prove you need it. Without these vaccines, thousands of kids died every year from these diseases. Now, only a few hundred do- and that is up dramatically from before the anti-vax tide.

    • valerie

      LMAO you are just too much. is this the generation that will be running the world. god help us all.

      • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

        95% of children are vaccinated. Darwinian Evolution would lead me to conclude that those unvaccinated kids will not be ruling the world. At least I hope.

    • Dee

      Did you even read the article. These ingredients can be toxic in high (extremely high) doses. They are harmless in tiny doses. So is salt, so is water which is something our bodies need but too much in one setting and you can die(look up dilutional hyponatremia). A mercury dirivitive is not the same as mercury (of which their are different types not all of them threatening to us in small doses) in fact mercury is a naturally occurring compound in our bodies, as is formaldehyde, in much higher levels than the thimersol used in vaccine (now only found in flu shots, which are not required for most of the population and there is a thimersol free version, it cost more, if that’s really such a big deal to you) and the trace amounts of formaldehyde which may still be in the vaccines after their purification. It is used to sanitize the vaccine so you don’t inject live viruses and/or bacteria into the patient thus making them sick. So yeah, its safe because of math. Mathematics isn’t some scary voodoo curse, I don’t particularly enjoy the subject, but it is important and does in fact have relevance here. Yes, we have the right to understand whats in vaccines and why. And this article even explains some of that. Thimersol is a preservative so that multiple doses can be manufactured at once and distributed as they can be held for longer periods. Because people hear the word mercury and assume its poison, doesn’t mean it is. There are different types of mercury and not all of them are inherently harmful, some are relitively benign. A dirivitive of mercury, thus is not neccessarily harmful. And, since its no longer used (except in one vaccine which has an alternative that doesn’t use it and you don’t have to get it) should not be an issue anymore. At least not if facts actually matter to you. Just because YOU are not capable of understanding these facts or about vaccination in general doesn’t mean others don’t know it. Where is your “proof” that “hardly anyone” understands vaccines? I know a lot of people who understand vaccination. If “hardly anyone” understand, logically shouldn’t that mean I wouldn’t be able to know very many people who do understand it? And as for your claims that “most people get sick” after vaccination, or that most kids who are vaccinated are sick a lot? Do you know most people on the planet who are vaccinated and personally survey them? Where are you getting this information from? I know its not from actual statistics because every actual report on adverse side effects from vaccines indicated that such side effects are rare, less than 1%. And, where are you getting these stats proving most kids are sickly. Most children I know and know of are actually quiet healthy and resilient. Your experience with your son isn’t “proof” of anything, at most it would be one case study if it weren’t your son (the emotional ties between families creates a bias so your report alone wouldn’t count toward any kind of study). Also, since hundreds of studies on thousands of children (and I’m actually under-playing the numbers) have already proven that vaccine do NOT cause autism, your son’s lack of autism has absolutly no bearing on this topic. It literally proves nothing. My 2 siblings don’t have autism, display any autistic symptoms nor have any cognitive nor social abnormality; they are neurotypicals, perfectly healthy, social, and with no cognitive deficits. They were vaccinated. Vaccines did them absolutly no harm. I am autistic, like everyone else on the spectrum, I was born autistic. I vaccinated too, and like my siblings suffered no harm from it. My immune system is strong, I heal fast, and was rarely sick as a child. As for my cognitive abilities, I’m highly intelligent. Further, I feel no shame about my brain type, so metaphorically speaking, you can take your faulty opinions about my brain type (autism) and shove them up your pretentious @$$. Lastly, the diseases vaccines prevent are natural. We didn’t create them, and they have existed long before humans even had a full understanding of the germs, much less the ability to manipulate them. Vaccines were created to prevent these diseases and are the most effective way to do so. Those are verifiable facts, unlike the nonsense you’re spouting. Why don’t you actually do some research? Maybe then you wouldn’t have a problem understanding vaccines.

      • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

        I love what you wrote. But I’d love it more if you could use paragraphs. Puhlease!!!

        • Dee

          Sorry about that. I’ve been having trouble typing comments with paragraph breaks; I end up accidentally deleting the post or submitting the unfinished one instead of inserting a black space. So, I tend to just type them as one long stream, especially if I’m typing fast (motor coordination issues) since that increases these incidents.

    • Jeff Utz, M.D.

      THere’s toxins in fruit too. But it is the dose that is important. The amount of formaldehyde in a vaccine is 1000x less than the amount of formaldehyde normally found in the blood.

      Mercury derivatives don’t make us healthy; they are a tiny part of a few vaccines. However, the dose is so small to be almost none-existent, and below any value that has been shown to be harmful.

      People do grow up perfectly healthy without getting vaccines; they are also more lilely to die from vaccine-preventable diseases. The hypothesis that vaccines cause autism has been ruled out.

      Our bodies respond to millions of different antigens (molecules that cause an immune response) every day. We normally get exposed to different bacteria. The number of antigens that we get from vaccines is extremely small than the number we get from bacteria and visuses elsewhere, like from cuts and scrapes and in our food.

      The ingredients of the vaccines are listed on the labels and available not he web. From your argument, it seems clear that you don’t understand much, however.

      • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

        Like lesson number one in Toxicology 101 is “dose matters.” Sigh.

    • MissM

      “Your so called “math”.”??!! No. Math is not fictional. It does not require quotations or the words ‘so called’ in front of it.

      If you would like to see evidence regarding vaccines, I suggest you do some research (from reputable websites and actual doctors, not whackjob conspiracy sites and anecdotes from your friendly neighbourhood anti-vaccine mommy group).

      I sincerely hope by your comments about “unnatural lifestyles” that you aren’t suggesting “eating clean” or whatever as a preventative measure against polio, rubella, measles, pertussis, etc. These, and a host of other diseases, had been completely eradicated in first world countries before the completely discredited Dr. Wakefield published his highly falsified findings about the correlation between vaccines and autism. Not eating processed foods isn’t going to prevent you from contracting whooping cough. Sorry.

      It is absolutely beyond shameful in this day and age that there are children dying from diseases that scientists spent their lives creating a cure for. Absolutely shameful. I firmly believe that this little bit of history is going to be looked back on with disdain and embarrassment by future generations.

  • dbb555

    The flu vaccine will only work on the flu strain it was designed for. The producers GUESS which strain they THINK might show up and as yet after 28 years they have FAILED to guess correctly which means the millions upon millions of flu vaccine doses given out had absolutely no power to protect but incidentally did kill a million people due to fatal side effects..
    Why would I take an injection of a vaccine that could kill me but can’t prevent flu unless someone guessed the strain correctly?

    • watwat

      You’re a fucking idiot.

    • Susan Peck Knueven

      Please tell me where your got your statistic that 1 million people died as a result of getting the flu shot? And you need to do more research on how often the flu shot actually did cover the flu it was designed for~~The scientists have not been wrong often~~H1N1 is one of the few things not covered and they came out with that vaccine very quickly. If I am correct, and I know I am, more died from the flu itself than ever from the vaccine~~You need to do a lot more research before making the statements you have.

      • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

        Susan, you do realize that anti-vaxxers are also known as “lying liars who lie.” dbb555 invented numbers just to create a story.

        Good reply.

      • notation

        dbb got that from pulledoutofddbb’sass.com. Similar sources are available on request from “nut-jobs and wackaloons anonymous.”

      • blueberre

        I’m not taking a stand either way but, FYI, my son in the military received a flu shot with H1N1 a few years ago. The shot was given in October, he was diagnosed (through a lab) with H1N1 the following January. He pulled through, but said he had never felt so sick in his life.

        • Some Guy

          When a case like this appears, it’s important to remember that a vaccine is a boost to your own immune system. It tells your body what an intruder looks like and gives it practice on how to defeat it.

          In most cases, this prevents people from getting sick because their immune system is now practiced enough to fight off whatever pathogen it’s facing. It’s like a teaching method for your immune system.

          The only inherent problem with this is your immune system itself. The vaccine can’t stop the “bugs”, as people call them, from entering your body. It can only give you an advantage in fighting them off before they make you sick. If you get enough of a pathogen in you, or if your immune system weakens, you can still get sick.

          I’m sorry to hear that your son caught H1N1. I know it can be a rough bug to catch, and I’m glad he’s doing better. That being said, the reasons he got sick may not have been related to the failure of a vaccine, as our own bodies and the conditions around us can greatly impact our bodies’ ability to fight off pathogens.

    • notation

      Yer a dolt.

    • John

      Here here. SO many people are so sure of things they know very little about. How do I know they know very little about it? Because the people making the vaccines can’t explain why they don’t always work. NHL star Cory Perry recently got the mumps, even though he had the mumps vaccine as a kid. In my experience, most pro-vaccers are aggressive bullies in other aspects of life as well, and always tend to follow the leader, while most anti-vaccers have been taken too many times in other areas of life and are done with believing people and jump on the opportunity to have a say in their own life. See how this perpetuates the argument? Douch bag pro vaccers telling anti vaccers they are dumb, anti vaccers have been duped before so think that the pro vaccers are full of shit. To all you parents out there that are so afraid that a kid who didn’t get vaccinated will harm your new born or someone with a compromised immune system, what steps are you taking to avoid child obesity or mental health? I’d say focus on those two things and you’ll be fine, forget the anti vaccers.

  • Pingback: Quashing the hollow "polio vaccine causes cancer" myth()

  • delicate white.

    Fuck anti-vaxxers for driving up vaccine costs. Damn them.

    • Kevin Donnelly

      You’re not only blind, but illiterate too.

    • thinkitover

      Or maybe their child was damaged by watching tv before the age of one, or playing games on mom or dad’s i phone before the age of 3. There are excellent scientific studies about the effect those things have on the brain yet I have yet to see parents getting hot under the collar about those issues.

    • Dan

      That’s not how burden of proof works.

    • LongJohns454

      that’s some funny shit right there – please post a link to a publish scientific paper/study that shows vaccines cause autism.

    • Dee

      Actually there are a few that are available at 6 weeks. These have been proven to safe at that age. The next set is at 3-5 months, then about 18 months and then 3-5 years. Most vaccines are given in the 18months to 5 year range (because these ones wouldn’t be as safe earlier) which is also when symptoms of autism tend to manifest, hence the co-relation that some ignorant people try to say is a causative relationship when its not.

      • Chi

        Here in New Zealand, our immunization schedule starts at 6 weeks. They get 2 shots, one DTaP,/IPV/Hib and one PCV.

        So when my daughter was born, did I make sure everyone who would be in contact with her in those first 6 weeks have a pertussis booster? You bet your ass I did. My baby, my rules.

        • Dee

          I think you miss-read my post. I said that a few vaccines ARE available as young as 6 weeks and ARE safe. I then gave the common age frames for the next rounds of vaccinations. I also noted the the belief in vaccine having a causitive relationship is FALSE. I actively appose the dangerous anti-vaxxer psudo-science and encourage vaccination. Children should be protected and vaccines are the best way to do that. I would applaude you for your diligence in protecting your baby so fervently from pertussis as it can be deadly for an infant. In fact, I know of a case where a baby was killed by whopping cough as a direct result of anti-vacinne conspiracy taking hold in a community leading to an outbreak.

          • Chi

            I was using our immunization schedule as a means of agreeing with you that there are some available at 6 weeks.

            The DTaP booster is also available for free for women between 32 and 38 weeks of pregnancy – I got this.

            As is the flu shot – I got this also.

            To my way of thinking even if vaccines don’t give my daughter full immunity for whatever reason, they will at least provide her with enough that she won’t get full-blown cases of these diseases. And that’s really the main reason I vaccinate – to prevent her from suffering through diseases that can and will make her miserable.

          • Dee

            Ok, sorry my mistake.

          • Some Guy

            Thumbs up for you, mate. Wish you and your daughter all the best. c:

    • Chardelle Penman

      good point, but why should you dole out the punishment? Are you God? Maybe there is no God to you, but the universe is intelligent enough to serve everyone their own Karma. It’s not all up to you, champ. Could you live with yourself after harming another child’s parent? What if that parent were you? Would you deserve a second chance? The spread of disease through our kids is out of ignorance, as I don’t think any sane person would intentionally want to infect your kid, or theirs! Intention is what matters. Punishment is petty, gives people a false sense of entitlement, when you yourself are already guilty of something else. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” said Jesus.
      I am not a Christian, I have just seen people get what they deserve, without having to lift a finger on my behalf, because the energy you send out is exactly what comes back to you, 100%. Let’s educate (+), not punish (-).

      • Dan

        What about those 14,000 kids who starve to death every year? Did they get what they deserved? Your entire outlook is dependent on you living in a bubble.

      • notation

        Oh, FUCK you and your idea of “karma.” Get a god-damn education, you moron. You’re a disgusting dolt who is inexcusably ignorant.

      • Chi

        Two words for you on that one. Pox parties. People who ACTIVELY look for children with diseases and then bring their children around to play with that child, maybe share a lollipop or a juice box. Chicken pox of course is the most common, but I’ve heard of people doing it with measles too.

        Intention DOES matter. If you intentionally not vaccinate then you should accept the consequences if YOUR child serves as a conduit for an infectious disease that kills or severely maims a vulnerable child or elderly person. And by the way, they CAN figure out who patient zero was in an outbreak.

        I agree, people need to be educated. They need to understand why vaccines are important and how they work to protect the community at large.

        They don’t need to be pushed away by anti-vaxx propaganda spouting quacks who rely solely on anecdotal evidence and emotional blackmail in order to sell their ‘all natural’ ‘cures and supplements’.

    • Jeff Utz, M.D.

      If you want to go completely organic, please don’t forget to move outside. Living in houses or apartments is not natural. Stop pooping in toilet. Not natural. Get your own food by hunting or growing your own food. No guns. They’re not natural, either. Stop using the computer and cell phones. Not natural.

    • thinkitover

      Ever take Tylenol for anything? Go online sometime and read the possible side effects. Ever take a cold capsule or give your child children’s motrin? Ever read the 2 pages of information that comes in the box about that? Most of the medications we take come with lists of possible side effects. The litigious world we live in means every side effect must be noted no matter how unlikely. We accept these risks to get rid of a headache or the symptoms of a cold, why balk at seeing similar warnings on a vaccine? In the world we live in it is not hard to get juries to award judgment for perceived injuries from taking medication (this is exactly why every medicine has those long lists of effects.) In the case of vaccination the court cases were helped by studies undertaken by a doctor who now freely admits he wangled data to get the conclusions he wanted, conclusions that said vaccines were dangerous. This is the shaky science vaccine denial is based on.

      • Chi

        Also, VAERS isn’t a reliable source of info as ANYONE can make a report to it, not just doctors. One guy actually submitted a (fake) report that the flu vaccine turned him into the incredible hulk. Just to prove how easy it is for false reports to be filed. Also that amount paid out over how many years of people receiving vaccines? I think you find that actually equates to about $1 per vaccine.

        And we NEVER say side-effects DON’T happen. We say they don’t happen as often as anti-vaxxers would have you believe. You have a higher chance of being hit by lightning or winning the lottery than you do of getting a vaccine injury. Just saying.

    • watwat

      What the fuck do you think vaccines are, you moron?

    • LNursey

      vial fragments? Get a grip! medications are drawn up from a vial with a rubber lid and if not there are needles with filters you MORON! ugh people like you just make me soooo angry

    • watwat

      That is not propaganda – that is truth.

      That’s what you idiots do. You ignore scientific facts and logic. GTFO.

    • thinkitover

      She is telling the simple truth.

    • LNursey

      wow now you are just spreading some absolute bullshit, there has been one doctor in the world who published that vaccines cause autism and he lost his license and was labeled a QUACK! stop spreading this you are actually going to do real harm here

    • Chi

      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Woo

      Woo, is basically psuedoscience that anti-vaxxers try to pass off as ACTUAL science and fact, when there is no actual evidence to support such claims.

    • Some Guy

      Are you asking why we exclude homeopaths, naturopaths, and chiropractors from who to discuss vaccination with? Well, namely because it isn’t what they’re informed about.

      When you want to talk to someone about how to file your taxes, you go to someone well-versed in accounting and taxes. You generally don’t ask the cashier at the grocery store, because he might not know reliable information.

      A licensed healthcare practitioner refers to professionals who are licensed to work in health care. It’s registered nurses, nursing practitioners, and doctors. These people went through years of secondary education to learn specifically about this section of information, and will either know the answers or have the best chance at finding the information when they don’t.

      A chiropractor didn’t go to school to learn about vaccines. His job is to help you get your spine in the proper place. It’s just not his scope of practice (what he’s qualified to do as a professional), and what he tells you might be as incorrect as what the cashier tells you.

      Disclaimer: Yes, I know some doctors are shitty, but there are people who don’t know how to do their jobs in every field.

    • Dan

      You can’t even spell her name, so I’m not sure why anybody would take advice from you regarding research..

    • thinkitover

      They admit to side effects for the same reason Tylenol, Motrin, Ex Lax or any other medication posts their side effects. If you want to read evil intent into the listing of side effects can I take it that you wish to exclude all health remedies (even the homeopathic stuff has possible side effects.) I can’t say for certain if that excise tax is a real thing or a vaccine denial pseudo fact but to give you the benefit of the doubt, I there have been judgments rendered against many companies including some of the herbal and natural supplements. We live in a litigious world and it is not hard to find a person or a company involved in health care that has not settled a case against themselves. Maybe we should go back to the days when no one went to the doctor unless they were dying but then to hear the vaccine denials, no one was ill then and everything was sunshine and roses compared to today.

    • watwat

      That’s LSD, you dipshit. Apples and oranges.

      The blogger posted LD50 values. Do you understand what that even means?

    • Some Guy

      Cancer is terrible. But measles has and will kill again. People die of measles, and that cancer exists does not change that.

      It’s sort of like saying that we shouldn’t worry about drinking bleach (even though that could kill you) because people die every day from crocodile attacks.

      And look, I’m not trying to be rude; but the point is that you’re basically saying that we should only worry about one problem at a time. Many people die from cancer, but that doesn’t mean I want to see extra (preventable) deaths because we don’t have solid ways of preventing or curing cancer.

    • watwat

      Gobbligupe? If you were educated, you would have no problem understanding this article.

      Get the fuck out of here, you uneducated piece of garbage.

    • thinkitover

      I think you misunderstand vaccines. They don’t protect against the common cold. I also think you are romanticizing the past. In your day people could and did die of measles, mumps, rubella, whooping cough and many other childhood diseases. The way that vaccines are working is that until recently when more and more parents stopped allowing their children to be vaccinated, fewer people died of those things. But hey let’s take your point a bit further, in your day there was no antibiotic and by your own post no one died of illness so let’s just get rid of antibiotics and anything else they didn’t have then. No doubt that would make you very comfortable.

    • Chi

      Except that looks at general data and not the specific AREAS where the outbreaks occur. Yes California GENERALLY has a good vaccination rate. HOWEVER in the communities where the outbreaks occurred, the vaccination rates had dropped to something like 80-85%. State-averages are NOT a good indication of what’s ACTUALLY happening.

      Bad data, twisted to meet flawed logic. Come back when you learn how to math.

    • thinkitover

      If you listened to the scientists instead of the mathematicians you would know that the equation you went to the trouble to make up is not indicative of causation. To give you an example; for the last 2 weeks I have changed my routine and had a cup of coffee in the morning, also for the last 2 weeks the price of oil has gotten lower. Did my coffee mornings cause the price of oil to lower or did the lower price of oil cause me to drink coffee? I think we both know the answer to that but it is possible to draw what science calls a correlation effect. In other words those things happened at the same time but may or may not have anything to do with each other. If we did the studies I am sure we would prove that neither thing caused the other. In the case of vaccine’s there is a small correlation effect observed and studies have proved no causality. The other factors that could also cause or contribute to the rise in autism and LDs are vast and include things for which there are studies showing possible causal effects (thinks like earlier ages of watching TV and more time watching TV for children or the earlier ages children are exposed to online or video game playing and the amount of time spent doing so.) There are things that have been changing the brain chemistry of our babies and toddlers but we have been ignoring them in large part because paying attention to them doesn’t fit our cultural norms. Vaccinations have been proven not to cause autism and LDs.

    • Chi

      I respect your right to choose. However, your choice doesn’t affect only your son, it affects all other people your son has contact with on a daily basis.

      What if your son DOES get measles. He may be fine, but it is a highly contagious disease and can live in air particles in a room for up to two hours. Meaning anyone who breathes the same air as your infected son has a chance to catch it.

      Now what happens if one of the children at your son’s daycare centre is immunocompromised due to a battle with cancer or a transplant operation and cannot be vaccinated for measles? What if your son infects that child and they die from encephalitis?

      Can you understand where I’m going with this? If you do not have a legitimate medical reason for not vaccinating then I’m sorry, I think you’re a selfish excuse for a human being. Vaccines are safe. Vaccines are effective and it’s because people like you ‘choose’ not to vaccinate for whatever reason that we are seeing the return of vaccine preventable illnesses in places where they had been all-but eradicated.

    • thinkitover

      Giving your child antibiotics for a raging pneumonia can have serious side effects too perhaps even lead to death. Most of us would risk it recognizing that the possibility of death from the illness was far greater than the risk of an adverse side effect from the medication. The problem with parents who make a choice for “my child” is that they are not just making that choice for their child, they are making a choice that impacts everyone. As these illness return they are adapting and becoming harder to treat effectively. The vast majority of parents making this choice aren’t doing so because of family histories of auto immune disease, they are doing it because someone told them vaccine equals autism. That is a stance that is not proven by science and yet many parents are acting as though it were and making a huge life decision based on that belief. The folks who claim that science proves vaccination cause autism and LDs are perpetrating a hoax and the parents that fall for it are increasing the likelihood of a return to 19th century standards of illness and medicine.

  • Pingback: Utovar nedeljom, 13. april | Suština pasijansa™()

  • Pingback: Don't unintentionally fund an antivaccination front organization()

  • Pingback: Hey vaccine deniers–it’s just simple math. Part deux.()

  • Pingback: Yes, the autism rate is rising–vaccines aren't the cause()

Powered by WordPress 4.1
Don't forget to subscribe to this blog through any the services in the right sidebar.