Skeptical Raptor

2021-09-302021-09-30

Vaccine mandate history – USA owes its existence to one

3
3
Shares

The American vaccine mandate history goes all the way back to the American Revolutionary War when General George Washington ordered smallpox vaccinations for all soldiers in 1777. I bet most people don’t know the history of the vaccine mandate, but I was amazed to read how far back it went in US history.

However, vaccine mandates history includes a lot of other events that tell us that not only have mandates been a part of the fabric of American history, it’s also constitutional. And I’m briefly going to cover it in this article.

2021-09-292021-09-29

YouTube bans vaccine misinformation – sometimes science prevails

1
3
4
Shares

On 29 September 2021, YouTube announced that it was banning all videos with vaccine misinformation, and it was banning the accounts of several dangerous anti-vaccine activists such as Joseph Mercola, Erin Elizabeth, Sherri Tenpenny, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The tide is turning against the vaccine denialists who have used social media, including YouTube, to push anti-vaccine nonsense. It couldn’t happen soon enough.

YouTube said it would remove videos claiming that vaccines are not effective in reducing the rates of transmission or contraction of the disease. It will remove content that includes disinformation about the ingredients in a vaccine. And they will remove any video that claims that approved vaccines cause autism, cancer, or infertility. Finally, they will remove any information that claims that vaccines contain electronic trackers.

2021-09-282021-09-28

Catie Clobes v NBC – problematic anti-vaccine lawsuit against a journalist, Part 2

1
3
4
Shares

This article, part 2 of the Catie Clobes v NBC anti-vaccine lawsuit, was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

Professor Reiss writes extensively in law journals about the social and legal policies of vaccination. Additionally, Reiss is also a member of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices for Vaccines, a parent-led organization that supports and advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable disease. She is also a member of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy.

In part 1, I explained the elements of defamation and why Ms. Clobes will likely be a limited-purpose public figure for her lawsuit against NBC. This lawsuit would require her to prove actual malice, which she has neither alleged nor is likely to be able to show.

In this post, I will explain why Ms. Clobes is also unlikely to be able to prove the claims against NBC in the article are false. As a reminder, “Only false statements of fact can be defamatory. Arguments, characterizations, insults, and aspersions can’t be unless they are premised on explicit or implied false statements of fact.” The claims that large parts of the article being opinion and not fact is essentially negating their case. Any parts of the article that are opinions are not defamation.

2021-09-272021-09-28

Catie Clobes v NBC – problematic anti-vaccine lawsuit against a journalist, Part 1

13
3
16
Shares

This article about the Catie Clobes v NBC lawsuit was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

On September 24, 2021, anti-vaccine activist Catelin (Catie) Clobes filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Minnesota against NBC and two of its journalists, Brandy Zadrozny and Aliza Nadi, alleging defamation, emotional distress [sic], and “reasonable care” [sic].

The review of Catie Clobes v NBC is quite long, so this article will be published in two parts, with the second one being available tomorrow.

2021-09-272021-09-27

COVID vaccine development process – how it compares to “normal”

3
3
Shares

Back before the world of the COVID-19 pandemic, the vaccine development process took a long time. Despite the nonsensical claims of the anti-vaccine zealots, the vaccine development process is robust and thorough. The safety and effectiveness of all of the pre-pandemic vaccines are settled science (read the article before you jump up and down screaming about “settled science”).

However, the world of the COVID-19 pandemic meant that if we can save a few months or even years off the development timeline on a new COVID-19 vaccine, it could save hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of lives.

Of course, much of the optimism comes from experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the few rational public health experts who are willing to speak up in Washington DC. Maybe he has seen some secret data only available only to him and Bill Gates that supports this optimism. Maybe he just is trying to be the national cheerleader for healthcare.

I don’t know the real answer, but a lot of vaccine experts who have spent their lifetime studying vaccines, like Dr. Peter Hotez, MD Ph.D., have expressed dismay at how politics may “trump” good science.

So, this article will try to lay out the COVID-19 vaccine development process, along with the independent controls that make sure that all vaccines are safe and effective.

2021-09-252021-09-25

Vaccine licensing primer – correcting anti-vaccine misinformation

1
3
4
Shares

This article about vaccine licensing was written by Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Professor of Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law (San Francisco, CA), who is a frequent contributor to this and many other blogs, providing in-depth, and intellectually stimulating, articles about vaccines, medical issues, social policy, and the law.

Anti-vaccine activists want to claim the Pfizer vaccine is still experimental despite FDA licensing. They base that claim on a footnote in a document reauthorizing Pfizer’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). FDA is clear that the now fully-licensed vaccine is identical to the EUA vaccine (except of course for the labeling: the EUA vaccine still bears its EUA label), and that both can legally be marketed. The anti-vaccine claim is being made because the full licensure of the Pfizer vaccine renders moot their claim (not yet decided by a court) that you cannot mandate a vaccine licensed under the EUA.

2021-09-222021-09-22

Don’t fall for the Nirvana fallacy – COVID vaccines are safe and effective

1
3
4
Shares

I bet you’ve read that the new COVID-19 vaccines are not 100% perfect, so employing the Nirvana fallacy, must be avoided. That’s just not how one should look at medical data – whether examining vaccine safety and effectiveness or the usefulness of chemotherapy in treating cancer.

No medical procedure is perfectly safe or perfectly effective. Physicians and scientists never make those kinds of claims. In evidence-based medicine, benefits are weighed against risks based upon peer-reviewed published data.

I always like to say that when a physician reduces a fracture of the arm or leg, there is a small, but statistically significant chance of dying from something like a clot forming that goes to the heart or lungs. However, if you don’t reduce the fracture, there is a might higher chance of dying or permanent disability. Yet, I doubt that anyone would refuse the procedure despite the inherent risk.

Unfortunately, the bad math of the anti-vaccine world means that any risk that is not absolute 0% is rounded up to 100%, and vaccine effectiveness that is not absolutely 100% is rounded down to 0%. Yet, I’m sure if they had a broken arm, they would have the fracture reduced immediately.

This article is going to take a look at the Nirvana fallacy and how it relates to the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines.

2021-09-202021-09-20

COVID vaccine effectiveness against Delta variant –

3
3
Shares

During the 17 September 2021 FDA vaccine expert committee meeting, the COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against the Delta variant was reviewed. I want to assess some of the results so that we have a better understanding of how the vaccines are working against the Delta variant.

I have read all kinds of comments and reports about the COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against the Delta variant, but it will be good to see what data was presented to the top vaccine experts in the country. Let’s take a peek at the data.

2021-09-192021-09-30

Is natural immunity from COVID better than vaccines? Not really.

1
3
4
Shares

Another non-peer-reviewed preprint article about natural immunity versus vaccines for COVID-19 is being used as the “gotcha” moment for the anti-vaxxers. And on the surface, the article might be interesting, but it’s being misused. What a shocker.

I’m going to do a quick review of the article, then remind everyone why vaccinations are ALWAYS better than natural immunity. Outcomes from diseases that are prevented by the vaccine must be weighed against the safety and effectiveness of that vaccine. This is a necessary risk-benefit analysis that is required by every procedure or pharmaceutical in evidence-based medicine. And, this is the point that is missed by those pushing this new preprint.