Now on ScienceBlogs: A wee little elephantimorph from Ethiopia [Laelaps]

Seed Media Group

The Week In ScienceBlogs: Sign up for our newsletter.

Profile

Please read the DISCLAIMERS.

markhoofnagle.jpg Mark Hoofnagle has a MD and PhD in physiology from the University of Virginia, and is now a general surgery resident. His interest in denialism concerns the use of denialist tactics to confuse public understanding of scientific knowledge.

Chris Hoofnagle Chris Hoofnagle is a recovering Washington, DC lawyer and information privacy law expert at UC-Berkeley Law School. Denialism became apparent to him while working on consumer protection laws in Washington. The Denialists' Deck of Cards is essentially a how-to guide for being an industry lobbyist.

PalMD.jpgPalMD is a practicing internist in the Midwestern United States. Aside from the great joy he finds in his family and his work, he likes communicating some of that joy to others. He has a special interest in the ways patients---and we are all patients at one time or another---are deceived by charlatans. He aims to change the world, one reader at a time. Previous writings can still be found here.

Please read the DISCLAIMERS.


HONcode Certified

This blog is hosted by SEED Media Group; ad space on the top and right side belongs to them. The rest of the content is HONcode certified.

This website is accredited by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.

Search

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Blog carnivals

  • asclepius_phixr%282%29.jpg
  • BadgeMed.jpg

    Other

    « Tangled Bank #111 | Main | Diagnosis--what is the value? »

    Gardasil idiocy

    Category: Anti-Vax Denialism
    Posted on: August 6, 2008 11:37 PM, by PalMD

    Orac had a nice takedown of an idiotic piece on Medscape about the Gardasil vaccine. As he reported, the link to the bad article is now dead, perhaps as a result of blograge. Now, on the front page of Medscape is a poll---a poll regarding physician prescribing habits given the "news" about Gardasil:

    Serious neurologic, thromboembolic, and autoimmune complications have been reported in a small number of patients who received Merck's HPV vaccine, prompting a recent joint advisory by the FDA and CDC. But the agencies emphasize that the vaccine is safe. How will this news change your use of the HPV vaccine?

    This poll question, along with being just silly, asks a question that begs the question---it assumes that the statement as written is true. Of course, it is not. Lies abound regarding the vaccine.

    Look, it's reasonable to argue about whether HPV vaccines should be mandated, but arguing about the basic science is silly. Several HPV strains cause cancer. These cancers are serious health problems. The vaccine protects against the strains that cause the vast majority of these cancers. The vaccine is safe, and so far, in the post-marketing period, there have been far fewer reports of side-effects than most other vaccines.

    These are the facts. A policy debate standing on these facts is useful. All the rest is superstition.

    Comments

    1

    Oh, blatant pushpoll. Why not just come out and ask "When are you going to stop killing your patients?"

    Posted by: phisrow | August 7, 2008 5:43 AM

    2

    Slightly off-topic, but here's a scary article from today's Independent (UK) concerning the effects of the anti-vaccination ("causes autism") movement in the UK: http://tinyurl.com/68kkjt

    Posted by: Ray M | August 7, 2008 7:34 AM

    3

    It is time for the state to admit that just because one managed to breed does not grant one any special knowledge in how to raise children. Then, within that spirit, starting removing children from the homes of bad parents and then vaccinate the children.

    Posted by: I am so wise | August 7, 2008 10:53 AM

    4

    So are you saying that
    >Serious neurologic, thromboembolic, and autoimmune complications have been reported in a small number of patients who received Merck's HPV vaccine
    is not true or exaggerated?
    Thanks!

    Posted by: Kelly | August 7, 2008 11:46 AM

    5

    Please refer to the link above to Orac's article...thanks.

    Posted by: PalMD Author Profile Page | August 7, 2008 12:13 PM

    6

    "The vaccine is safe ..."

    Oops, not so fast.

    Like other vaccinations, breast implants, amalgams, various chemicals, pharmaceuticals, etc., there is a subset of human beings who have from mild to violent & temporary to permanent negative reactions from these products ... sometimes resulting in death.

    To these people, no defintion of 'safe' applies.

    " ... there have been far fewer reports of side-effects than most other vaccines."

    Which vaccinations are those?

    The VAERS database can be found here:

    http://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/index.html

    Posted by: Health Lover, Ilena Rose | August 8, 2008 12:21 AM

    7

    http://www.whale.to/vaccines/gardasil_h.html

    GARDASIL CANCER VACCINE PROBED FOR LINK TO 18 DEATHS

    Posted by: AntiVax | August 8, 2008 5:44 AM

    8

    had to laugh at the link provided by "AntiVax." "They" have been suppressing "electronic medicine" and other cures for cancer. And the mention of a "vaccine genocide."
    Very deep denialism.

    Posted by: had to laugh | August 8, 2008 9:03 AM

    9

    I know, don't feed the trolls...

    Ilena, the reports in VAERS aer seldom follwoed up for veracity nad often include anecdotal reports like, "I heard of someone who died after the shot." No names, no real info. VAERS is just for reporting. It cannot establish causality.

    But enjoy your vaginal cauliflower and cancer for all I care. I got the shot, and I'm doing keenly well.

    /points and laughs at AntiVax bahahahaha!

    Posted by: Rogue Epidemiolgist | August 8, 2008 7:37 PM

    10

    Guess it is time to once again cite Scopie's Law

    In any discussion involving science or medicine, citing Whale.to as a credible source loses you the argument immediately."

    Kathleen Seidel explains why

    Posted by: trrll | August 11, 2008 6:56 PM

    11

    Ok, know everyone loves having the mentality of both, its worth it to sacrifice a few for the sake of the masses, and that it won't happen to me ..... till it happens to them. But, there have been a lot of reports of adverse side effect with this drug, especially when you compare it to how long it has been out. Not to mention that this drug has not been studied long enough to know weather or not this will be as effective as they want you to believe.

    I mean isn't it common cense that even though you are helping to protect yourself again 4 strains of HPV that once those 4 strains are eliminated that the other 100+ strains will just become more dominant, or god help us that they mutate like all of our flu viruses have to wear none of our drug are successful in fighting them? Just think about it!

    Posted by: Jamie Hougas | September 17, 2008 11:06 PM

    12

    It's been thought about. Do you have a substantive point, or is this just another ill-informed rant? Read the literature. The "lot of reports" are actually mild, mostly irrelevant, and overblown.

    What's your real issue? Come on, you can tell us. We won't bite... honest!

    Posted by: LanceR | September 17, 2008 11:17 PM

    Post a Comment

    (Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





    ScienceBlogs

    Search ScienceBlogs:

    Go to:

    Advertisement
    Advertisement

    © 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

    Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM