July 9, 2008
Category: Anti-Vax Denialism • Medicine • Science • Sexism
Complementing Pal's essay on Gardasil yesterday is our buddy la Pobre Habladora guest blogging on Feministe.
Which, I think, brings us to a new angle on anti-vax denialism because as Pal mentions, the motivations behind harping on Gardasil are different than the usual nonsense. Gardasil, to everyone's dismay, has become intertwined with sexual politics in this country. As the only vaccine that has been identified as preventing a sexually-transmitted disease (the HepB vaccine managed to avoid this, not to mention an association with IV-drug use) there has been a clear impetus among the anti-sex crowd to malign this treatment for girls.
Two things which I think are disgusting and idiotic about this practice. One, I'm willing to bet if it were for boys and not girls, we wouldn't have this problem. Second, it suggests there is a subset of parents that feels that if their children somehow violate the rules of sex that disease and death should be the wages of their sin.
Is there nothing not disgusting about these attitudes? While the CNN article doesn't get into this nonsense, let's not forget the main obstacle to the acceptance of this highly-effective vaccine is not safety issues (it's a very safe vaccine and the incidents cited in the article are likely coincidence) but rather the amoral bigotries of idiots who are desperate to control women's sexuality - even to the detriment of women's health.
Posted by MarkH at 5:29 AM • 0 Comments
July 8, 2008
Category: Anti-Vax Denialism
It's worse than I thought.
A local investigative reporter has just broadcast a report on mercury, vaccines, and autism that was devoid of any investigation. It was a piece of lazy journalism, relying on the propaganda of the antivax cults, rather than real medical information. It was a pure propaganda piece. Before this aired, I did email Wilson and offer to hook him up with actual experts. I received no reply.
Let me share some details...
Read on »
Posted by PalMD at 11:16 PM • 5 Comments
Category: Anti-Vax Denialism
That's the question posed by CNN yesterday. It's a good question. Any time a new vaccine or treatment is available, safety is a concern. Pre-marketing testing is likely to miss very rare reactions, so the government monitors new drugs when they hit the market. Gardasil has so far been quite safe, which does not rule out very rare problems that my crop up as more people are vaccinated.
Added to the general level of suspicion regarding Gardisil is Merck's very aggressive marketing campaign aimed at the public and at state legislators.
All that aside, Gardasil is probably a good idea. Much of the hullabaloo surrounding its use has been ridiculous---attacks from religious fanatics and anti-vaccination cultists. In evaluating this promising new vaccine, we must set aside the noise from the wackos, and view things more objectively.
Read on »
Posted by PalMD at 3:07 PM • 14 Comments
Category: Religious Extremism
Arghhh!!! Framing. What is it?
Is it a way of communicating issues effectively to diverse populations? Or is it another word for compromising your values until they become meaningless?
In his latest piece, SciBling Matt Nisbet shows it to be the latter. While many of us are shaking our heads as we are forced to choose a candidate who panders to religion, Nisbet praises Obama's strategy of co-opting the Religious Right's message by supporting faith-based charities.
If your only goal is to elect Obama, perhaps this is a good strategy. If your goal is to continue to improve our (secular) nation, this is hardly a step forward. To continue this unnatural mingling of government and religion is a mistake. It does not improve delivery of charitable services (Bush's plan has been a complete failure). It also makes services less accessible in a diverse community. If you do not wish to support your local Lutheran church, for instance, but they are the ones with the alcohol rehab program, well, that's one more barrier to recovery.
Make no mistake---funding faith-based initiatives is religious extremism. Frame it however you will, it is another erosion of our personal liberties. This is not a place for compromise.
Posted by PalMD at 8:29 AM • 19 Comments
July 7, 2008
Category: Medicine
I'm starting to worry about health coverage in the NY Times. Lawrence Altman is a great health reporter, and I like one of Michael Pollan's pieces in particular, but the Times also has a bunch of those blog-thinggies, and one of the writers has disappointed me before.
Oops, she did it again...
Read on »
Posted by PalMD at 6:07 PM • 13 Comments
Category: Medicine • Medicine
Look, I know no one is weeping for doctors and their complaints about payment cuts, but you should at least be concerned, and here's why.
Some doctors are rich...very rich. Most are not. Medical education is largely financed with debt, and primary care doesn't pay all that much. Small practices work on narrow margins, and often run "paycheck to paycheck". For internists, a large percentage of payments come from Medicare, the national health insurance program that covers seniors. Doctors participate with Medicare voluntarily---there is no law requiring us to see Medicare patients or to bill Medicare for them.
Read on »
Posted by PalMD at 2:14 PM • 41 Comments
July 6, 2008
Category: Wasting your time
GrrlScientist inspired me to upload some of my Up North pics.
Red pine groves on granite outcrops are a characteristic feature of Algonquin Park.
Red Pines have reddish bark which flakes off in thin scales.
Their needles come in groups of two.
Posted by PalMD at 6:11 PM • 2 Comments
July 5, 2008
Category: Evolution Denialism
When will the stupidity end?
Really. When?
As long as Conservapedia exists, the answer will elude us. The latest feculent flow of irrational idiocy concerns the Lenski Affair.
Just to remind you, a biologist named Lenski did a very cool experiment regarding evolution in E.coli. Some creationist cult leader was displeased. Since his god has apparently refused to smite the biologist, the cult leader has looked into legal remedies in the fight against biology. Apparently, his god isn't smart enough to have come up with evolution.
Now it appears that an open letter is being drafted to the cultists. This is way too much fun.
Posted by PalMD at 5:09 PM • 14 Comments
July 3, 2008
Category: Medicine
Sometimes things just fall into your lap. This evening I was working on a different piece, and not getting very far, when an email arrived in my in-box.
You see, when you write for the 21st most influential science blog, you get a lot of unsolicited mail (OK, fine...I get spam in my blog-related inbox. But my spam is cool.)
What's great about a lot of this spam is that it is usually written by an actual person, and directed at me by name, which means they had to at least glance at the blog. In this case, a "glance" was all, or perhaps the writer simply suffers from poor reading comprehension. My latest correspondent is selling an herbal extract for diabetes. It seems unlikely that she's read my writing about this particular topic. See, as an internist, I'm very well-trained in the management of diabetes. It's what I do. And I hate, HATE, people who interfere with the treatment of this very serious disease with a bunch of cult medicine bullshit.
Read on »
Posted by PalMD at 5:56 PM • 37 Comments
Category: Cranks • Medicine
Orac was kind enough to pollute my inbox with the latest idiocy from the journal that has never met a crank it didn't like. As Orac says, "Medical Hypotheses [is] the journal where the editors encourage the authors to make shit up."
Before I tell you about the latest "hypothesis", let me give you an idea of what kind of thinking goes into this publication. The latest issue has an editorial that argues that it is the "maverick" scientist who makes the real scientific breakthroughs, and that teamwork is only for the "modestly talented".
Read on »
Posted by PalMD at 12:20 PM • 27 Comments
Mark Hoofnagle has a PhD in physiology from the University of Virginia and is currently a 3rd year medical student. His interest in denialism concerns the use of denialist tactics to confuse public understanding of scientific knowledge.
