Orac is the nom de blog of a (not so) humble pseudonymous surgeon/scientist with an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone, somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his miscellaneous verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to himself that few will. (Continued 
I suppose I had better get ready for another e-mail with a wounded, puppy-dog, plaintive complaint of "I'm not really anti-vaccine" in it. You see, that's what has happened in the past a couple of times after I wrote about that pediatrician to the children of the stars (in particular Jenny McCarthy's child) and ubiquitous go-to pediatrician whenever the media wants to hear some "skepticism" about the safety of vaccines, Dr. Jay Gordon. Clearly, it really, really bothers him when someone refers to him as being "anti-vaccine," but what other term fits him so well these days? After all, Dr. Gordon toes the anti-vaccine party line from Generation Rescue, Talk About Curing Autism, and, of course, the celebrity mom of his patient, and he has the "too many, too soon" spiel down pat. He shows up at rallies to give speeches to parents carrying explicitly antivaccination signs proclaiming their children as "poisoned" and "damaged' by vaccines, one sign even referring to them as "weapons of mass destruction."
Honestly, what am I supposed to call Dr. Gordon, if not "anti-vaccine"? He hangs out with hard-core antivaccinationists--more than that, leaders of the anti-vaccine movement--and talks the anti-vaccine talk so well. He's become the go-to interview whenever a lazy journalist wants some vaccine "skepticism" from a medical professional. What more does one need?
The other day, once again Dr. Gordon demonstrated his skill with anti-vaccine talking points in this interview with Cookie Magazine. It's painful to read such idiocy flowing from the lips of a physician. Indeed, it's even worse than listening to Dr. Michael Egnor spew creationist nonsense hither and yon, because at least for Dr. Egnor evolution is not part of his area of expertise. For Dr. Gordon, vaccines should be considered part of his area expertise, but you'd never know it from the data-free, anecdote-filled nonsense he spouts. For example, listen to his response to a question about why he buys into the "too many, too soon" mantra and advocates "staggering" vaccines:
I think the immune system, like every other system of the body, matures slowly, and that it can better tolerate viral infection at older ages and better tolerate one virus at a time. The other thing is that vaccines all contain other ingredients. They contain aluminum, they contain tiny bits of formalin [an aqueous solution of formaldahyde]. So I recommend waiting as long as parents are comfortable, and vaccinating very, very slowly. I also ask parents to wait at least six months before the first vaccine. I prefer to wait a year.
Formaldehyde? Aluminum? Oh, my God! Toxins! I can't believe a physician is parroting the "toxin" gambit about vaccines. That's the single most idiotic and scientifically ignorant rhetorical gambit antivaccinationists use, and Dr. Gordon apparently buys into it. Did Dr. Gordon skip pharmacology class in medical school?
Of course, Dr. Gordon, showing that even physicians can be prone to putting too much stock in testimonials and anecdotes over science and epidemiology, points out the cases of regression he's seen after vaccination, argues:
Now, many people would argue that vaccines are only for the better. I would say that there's no free lunch; it is lovely to be immune to whooping cough, but if I have to diminish your health a little bit to do that, I have to hesitate. Integrity demands that I tell you other parts of the story: I saw one child who developed seizures two days after her two-month appointment, and she didn't get any shots. It's true that the onset of autism often coincides with the time that kids are getting their shots. But the vast majority of times that I see a temporal relationship, I'm assuming it's not a coincidence.
Assuming? Note that Dr. Gordon cannot produce a single scientific study to support his beliefs. Not one. In fact, I once replied to one of his e-mails chastising me for referring to him as "anti-vaccine." In my response, having seen snippets of his video posted to YouTube and other places as well as a video of his speech to the "Green Our Vaccines" rally, I asked him pointedly but politely if he could provide me with the references to the scientific studies that support what he said in those videos and, most importantly, at the Green Our Vaccines rally.
Dr. Gordon never got back to me. I wonder if he'll get back to me now.
While I wait, I'll point out that Dr. Gordon continues to say truly dumb things about the MMR like:
It's a live-virus vaccine. A live-virus vaccine, in order to work, creates a little bit of an infection. And when you get measles, you get it through your nose and your throat, [which triggers a very specific immune response.] When we inject measles, we are bypassing that system and going right into the bloodstream. And we're finding that yes, there can be some impact on the intestinal tract and to the brain from the measles vaccine. And it's a vaccine of almost no benefit to American children, one by one. Now, in terms of public health, I don't want to be the guy who said, "Boy, this vaccine stinks." It doesn't stink. It works very, very well. The reason we don't have measles in America is because the vaccine works great. But sit down, please. Let's talk about the fact that your cousin and your other cousin both have autism. Or that your son has some questionable neurological issues, he seems to be speaking or walking a little later. I don't want to mess with him.
Number one: The measles vaccine is not of "almost no benefit to American children." It keeps measles at bay, and the resurgence of measles that we have seen in the U.K. and are now seeing in the U.S., thanks to decreased levels of vaccination due to fearmongering about the MMR vaccine shows how little it would take for herd immunity to fail. Number two: There is zero scientifically sound evidence that the MMR causes autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders--or even "autistic enterocolitis." None. All we have is Andrew Wakefield's litigation-driven and incompetent "research," research so badly done that his co-authors almost all disavowed it when its deficiencies came to light. That Dr. Gordon apparently believes that shoddy pseudoscience does not speak well of him.
It gets worse. Gordon parrots the usual misinformation about mercury in flu vaccines and even mentions a 7-year-old getting a tetanus booster with mercury in it. It makes me wonder if he served as an uncredited background consultant for Steve Wilson, so similar is his patter to the misinformation served up by that "investigative journalist." Here's a hint, Dr. Gordon: Most children do not get the flu vaccine, especially not under two years of age, and, even as the use of the flu vaccine is encouraged, flu vaccines containing more than trace amounts of thimerosa are increasingly uncommon because of low demand. It is likely that the marketplace will soon render them all but extinct. Also, children don't suddenly get autism at age 7 after getting a vaccine. The bottom line is that children's exposure to thimerosal from vaccines is lower than it has been since the 1980s and is continuing to decline, but there's no sign of a significant decline in autism diagnoses. None. That's about as bulletproof epidemiological evidence as there is showing no correlation between the two. I know, I know, I'm probably wasting my time, given the way that Dr. Gordon goes back to the whole "toxins" idiocy again:
Right now we're creating vaccines using ingredients that are cheap preservatives, but it could be done better. It means, let's see if we can get the aluminum out of them. Let's see if we can get the formaldehyde out of them. Let's see if we can produce them in a way that makes a little more sense for safety.
Word to Dr. Gordon: Aluminum is not a preservative. It is an adjuvant. It's there to make the vaccine produce a stronger immune response and thus make the vaccine work better. It's an integral component of what makes the vaccine work. There's also no evidence it has anything to do with autism or any other neurodevelopmental or immunological disorder. Of course, now that the mercury is gone from all vaccines routinely given to children under two, we all know that aluminum is becoming the new mercury for antivaccinationists. Never mind that aluminum has been used for 80 years and has an exemplary safety record.
Oh, and, please, Dr. Gordon, please stop with the formaldehyde bit. I know it's a convenient scary-sounding chemical used in the vaccine manufacturing process that antivaccinationists like to point to, but by the time the finished vaccine is made, there's nothing more than a trace amount in any vaccine. You breathe more formaldehyde sitting in an L.A. traffic jam in your Mercedes (or whatever no doubt highly expensive care you drive, thanks to credulous patients like Jenny McCarthy) than is in any vaccine. The plastic products and varnishes in your house produce more. Really, Dr. Gordon, I'm not kidding when I say that it's downright embarrassing to me as a physician to see a fellow physician like you saying something so utterly scientifically ignorant for public consumption. Really. Take it as a bit of advice from one physician to another. Your repeating that particular bit of antivaccinationist propaganda just makes you look really, really ignorant. Of course, if you actually believe that stuff about formaldehyde, you are really, really ignorant. If you don't believe it, then you're really, really cynical. Take your pick.
On the other hand, perhaps you don't care. What else could explain your pièce de résistance? What else could explain this statement:
I think that the public health benefits to vaccinating are grossly overstated. I think that if we spent as much time telling people to breastfeed or to quit eating cheese and ice cream, we'd save more lives than we save with the polio vaccine.
The stupid, it sears. It burns thermonuclear. No, it flames supernova. Yeah, that's right, Dr. Gordon. Breast feeding and keeping cheese out of the diet will prevent the spread of infectious diseases better than vaccines. Funny, but Europeans eat lots more cheese than Americans, and they don't seem to be any less healthy than we are. On the other hand, per capita U.S. cheese consumption has been rising since the 1980s. Hey, I have an idea! Maybe it's maternal cheese consumption, not vaccines, that causes autism! In the meantime, we can have a whole bunch of svelte kids suffering from vaccine-preventable diseases.
As bad as Dr. Gordon's interview was, there was one thing even worse. I bet you know what it was if you've taken the time to look at the actual interview. That's right, the title of the web page is Q&A: Vaccine Experts. Dr. Gordon, a "vaccine expert"? I think not. But it's worse than that. Dr. Gordon's fact- and science-free interview is presented on equal footing, as a sort of "Point/Counterpoint" format with a real vaccine expert, Dr. Paul Offit. This is akin to telling "both sides" of the evolution-creationism manufactroversy by pairing Richard Dawkins or Sean Carroll as the expert supporting the theory of evolution and Ken Ham or Casey Luskin as the "expert" supporting creationism. It's the whole lazy, wretched "tell both sides of the story as though they are equivalent" habit that journalists just can't seem to stop writ large. As long as this is how anti-vaccine propaganda is reported by the media, advocates for the value of vaccines as a public health measure are losing. As long as Google searches for "vaccine" and other vaccine-related terms inevitably turn up page after page of anti-vaccine propaganda, we're losing, as PalMD points out. One website, the Vaccine Education Center, is not enough, nor is one book like Do Vaccines Cause That? (hat tip: Skeptico).
Finally, one last word to Dr. Gordon: If you're going to e-mail me and complain about how mean I am, please do me a solid. Please don't bother unless you can stir yourself to provide me something other than whines about how unfair I'm being when I describe you as "anti-vaccine." You think I'm being unfair? Prove it. Of course, doing so would take some actual--oh, say--scientific evidence to back up your statements, and you've assiduously avoided providing that in the past.
Medicine & Health
Comments
...or to quit eating cheese and ice cream...
Ice cream?
ICE CREAM?????
IS HE FUCKING NUTS?????
Obviously, yes. Remember: "Without ice cream, there would be chaos and darkness" (Don Kardong)
Posted by: T. Bruce McNeely | July 19, 2008 10:58 AM
Ok, so which came first: Has Dr. Gordon's spouting of fearmongering nonsense to uneducated, credulous, deep-pocketed patients like Jenny McCarthy contributed to her and others wallowing in this pseudoscience, or was the 'GOV' movement already underway before he hitched his wagon to Jenny's star? Either way it's deeply repugnant to see a pediatrician go off the rails like this--I'm just interested to know the 'first cause'. Do all roads lead to Andrew Wakefield?
psst...Orac, it's 'toe the line', not 'tow'. Feel free to delete this after you make the change.
Posted by: Danio | July 19, 2008 11:05 AM
A correction, it wasn't incompetent research by Wakefield, it was fraud plain and simple. He was told before the paper published that all of the positives were false positives. He was told by the man who ran PCR on them, a technique that is orders of magnitude more sensitive and more precise than the immunological method Wakefield used.
It was fraud, not incompetence. There is a big difference.
Posted by: daedalus2u | July 19, 2008 11:29 AM
And when you get measles, you get it through your nose and your throat, [which triggers a very specific immune response.]
- I heard that recently from a woman I met socially. She claimed her doctor had told her. It sounded dubious to me - is there any truth in it?
Posted by: Skeptico | July 19, 2008 11:41 AM
Danio:
Gordon's been at it for at least three years that I know of. In May 05 I wrote about an article of his in The Huffington Post. His arguments haven't gotten any better in the interim.
Posted by: Skeptico | July 19, 2008 11:50 AM
Has Dr. Gordon managed to get the pathogens to buy into his new leisurely schedule of immunizations? What if the ?Bordetella pertussis clan don't prefer to wait a year and decide to visit a 3-month old child?
Skeptico ... measles is a respiratory infection, airborne when the victim sneezes and coughs. In the early stages it's hard to tell from a cold, and conveniently for the virus, that's also when viral production is at a peak. By the time the spots appear, the child has been infecting everyone in sight, and anyone who inhales his virus-loaded sneeze particles for as long as half an hour AFTER the child has left the room.
Posted by: Tsu Dho Nimh | July 19, 2008 11:59 AM
Perhaps it's about time to do a similar "point/counterpoint" on subjects like, oh, racism or embezzlement.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | July 19, 2008 12:01 PM
Actually, Dr. Gordon's gotten a lot worse in the last three years. I used to think he was at least semi-reasonable about vaccines and only leaning towards drinking the antivax Kool Aid. Now I know he's drunk deeply of it. His whine that "I'm not anti-vaccine" notwithstanding, he has clearly made his decision and gone over completely to the Dark Side. It won't be long now before he starts making claims that better sanitation, not vaccines, eliminated various diseases.
Meanwhile, he's not even making a pretense anymore of distancing himself from the more radical anti-vaccine groups, such as Generation Rescue.
Still, I haven't given up all hope. I hope I'm not wrong about this, but in his heart, Dr. Gordon seems decent, just misguided. After his involvement in the Eliza Jane Scovill case, Dr. Gordon clearly felt really, really bad, apparently bad enough to stop flirting with HIV/AIDS denialism, as he had been doing before. Gone from his website are all the dubious "natural" treatments for HIV/AIDS and bits about anti-HIV therapies harming the immune system. That's a good thing. I just hope it doesn't take a similar vaccine-related disaster to persuade him that the anti-vaccine path he has started down is both bad patient care and bad public health.
Posted by: Orac | July 19, 2008 12:14 PM
Cue the violins and cry me a river for poor Jay Gordon, who is really, really bothered
when he is referred to as being anti-vaccines, just because he associates with celebrity anti-vaccination activists, speaks at anti-vaccination protests, and spews anti-vaccination talking points in the media.
Those who choose to deviate from the mainstream into the "alternative," certainly have the right to make that choice, but they must also accept that that choice, like any other choice, has consequences.
I am just a beauty school drop-out, and I find his ignorance embarrassing -- especially that nonsense about cheese and ice cream. I cannot even begin to imagine how embarrassing it must be for physicians.
Posted by: Margaret Romao Toigo | July 19, 2008 12:26 PM
On consideration, it looks like Dr. Gordon is doing a bang-up job in his business. Any professional who wants to be successful as an independent practitioner (engineering, law, accounting, whatever) has to spend at least 30% of hir time in "marketing" -- generating new business. The marketing strategies can vary, but the necessity is always there.
One of the key characteristics of the professions is that the customers have limited ability to tell the good from the bad (although in engineering and law there's more likelihood of peer review showing up the posers.) Add the need for marketing and what happens is that the system selects for good marketers.
Which is what's happening here -- Dr. Gordon is a very good marketer, and is being lavishly rewarded for his specialization (which is not paediatrics but marketing.) In a society that defines "value" in market-driven terms, Dr. Gordon is a great paediatrician -- his bank balance proves it.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | July 19, 2008 12:34 PM
Tsu Dho Nimh:
I obviously didn't phrase my question well enough. I'll try again. The woman I spoke to said that because you get measles through your nose and your throat (not directly into the bloodstream via injection), this meant the vaccine was not as effective as getting immunity by catching the disease. I just wondered if there was anything in this supposed "benefit" in having your immune response triggered through the nose and throat.
Posted by: Skeptico | July 19, 2008 12:36 PM
Behavioral psychology 101: you get what you reward.
What is Dr. Gordon being rewarded for? What rewards is he actively seeking? Answer those and you've plotted his course.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | July 19, 2008 12:41 PM
Ick. That is something you have to wash off with a couple of showers.
Gordon on whether there is a population of kids genetically vulnerable to developing autism post vaccination: "I am 100 percent certain. The NIH child health division has a poster that says, 'Genetics load the gun, but environment pulls the trigger.' And that was invented mostly for pesticides and cleaning fluids underneath your sink. But we know that there is a genetic predisposition for diabetes, but you need a trigger. They've done identical-twin studies, one gets it one doesn't. What the hell happened? We know there's a genetic predisposition to autism, but I don't think that accounts for all cases."
He is right up there with holocaust deniers, creationists, and NARTH for being able to take things out of context.
Clap.
Clap.
Clap.
Posted by: NickG | July 19, 2008 12:47 PM
Actually, he may be technically correct on that one. Polio at its worst only killed a few thousand a year in the USA, and the consequences of obesity easily top that today.
Of course, it does make a difference what metrics you choose. "Lives saved" is not the same as "life-years saved" and especially not the same as "quality-adjusted life-years saved." Polio is nasty on those last two due to the ages of the typical victims and the lifelong consequences for the survivors.
On that note, the house my parents were living in when I was born is currently occupied by one of the youngest polio survivors in the USA. He's active in the survivor community and sees, in the others older than he, his future as post-polio syndrome works its course. Life is good -- enjoy it.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | July 19, 2008 12:50 PM
1) Vaccines aren't injected "directly into the bloodstream," they're injected into muscles. This should be a clue as to the reliability of the source.
2) There isn't some sort of "immigration and naturalization service" in the upper or lower respiratory system that magically causes a stronger immune response. Through the nose or through the skin or into the muscles, the immune system gets its cue when a macrophage picks up a virion.
The only thing that's accomplished by nasal-spray vaccines is a reduction in skin punctures in return for a much more problematic delivery; the adjuvants aren't as effective and the body's mechanical barriers (e.g. nasal mucus) have the potential to block enough of the vaccine to make immunogenesis less predictable.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | July 19, 2008 1:05 PM
Why are the likes of Jay Gordon not brought before the appropriate professional standards body for professional misconduct ?
There is no credible evidence that vaccines such as MMR are harmful, and to discourage patients from having such vaccines is surely beyond what would be expected of a doctor behaving in a professional manner.
Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 19, 2008 1:06 PM
What -- and get all that bad press for suppressing his freedom of speech?
State Medical Boards, like State Bar Associations, have a certain disinclination to micromanage the licensed practitioners. In both cases, there are "crash and burn" offenses (in law, the biggie is taking liberties with the escrow accounts.) Outside of those, a great deal of latitude is necessarily granted to professional judgment.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | July 19, 2008 1:11 PM
D. C. Sessions,
I take your point, but one might have thought that in medicine a biggie might just be advocating a policy that will kill and maim people.
Posted by: Matt Penfold | July 19, 2008 1:15 PM
ugh! i feel the distinct urge to bang my head against the wall now. as a pharmacologist, i have attempted (in a futile manner, i might add) to refute the "data" spewed by one of the followers of such alt-med/antivax campaigns by discussing the pharmacology of such. the result could be likened to throwing things at a brick wall. either the pharmacology (which i brought down to such a level that i felt was almost insulting) was too complex for the person to integrate into their understanding of the world, OR the synthesized arguments that he was pulling from whatever website did not account for an argument against someone from that angle. i say this because most of his biochemical arguments technically incorrect. (if one has to actually point out that a "protein" is not the same as a "nutrient" even if both are different types of chemicals, we have issues.) these synthesized arguments just lead to lots of mouths spewing the same bullshit over and over. and we all know that the side with the biggest mouth(s) must be right. especially in the world of hush-hush vaccine toxin autism etc coverups.
i won't go into the ridiculousness that spawned from that conversation, but i will say that if one more person tells me that copious amounts of vitamin c will negate the world's need for vaccines through its potent magical immune-boosting powers, i will not be liable for spasms in my right arm that might cause injury.
Posted by: leigh | July 19, 2008 1:34 PM
Actually, there are some differences. For instance, oral polio and nasal flu probably provide some IgA-mediated immunity at the mucosal surface, but it's usually not enough of a difference to matter.
Posted by: PalMD | July 19, 2008 3:05 PM
Thanks for the correction. I could also add the relative reduction of patient-to-patient transmission risk in mass immunization scenaria, but that would depend on the specifics of the aerosol delivery used.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | July 19, 2008 3:27 PM
None of you donkeys have a study that compares unvaccinated people to those who recieved the 1991 levels of mercury etc so you should shut your pieholes until that study comes out by decent independant scientists.
if you look at the amish unvaccianted population as a whole they dont get autism, jeez wonder why? Let the ad hoc excuses about genes come, waiting.
Posted by: cooler | July 19, 2008 3:45 PM
Cooler has no concept of Ockham's Razor because s/he is not allowed to have sharp objects. Remember that, now.*
*Paraphrased from someone or other in another Cooled thread.
Posted by: Skwee | July 19, 2008 4:11 PM
I don't know how you can stomach it day after day Orac. Obviously a voice of reason needs to exist but if I come across the stupid (say, a reiki vs. quantum touch discussion on an aromatherapy board) I fight the urge to troll, read half a page and close the page because I know the frustration is futile.
I guess blogging with the insolence is catharsis in a way but you must get.. so.. fucking.. tired.
Posted by: Niobe | July 19, 2008 4:45 PM
Why is it that Cookie magazine made a big deal of asking Offit about his financial interest is vaccines, but they let the money grubbing Jay Gordon off the hook? I would bet that Gordon is making more money off of his Hollywood practice and DVD sales, let us not forget the perquisites he gets, such as maybe, unlimited free tanning and pedicures for including a brochure from Felicia's House of Suntans and Wellness in his "new baby" gift baskets. This man is going to be responsible for deaths of babies (I mean other than the child who died of AIDS), but dang it he's going to look fine while they are dying.
Posted by: Nomad | July 19, 2008 5:11 PM
I can't speak for Orac (although we've done a fair bit of tag-teaming over the years) but for me it comes down to a few very simple principles:
1) Remember the lurkers. The brighter the stupid burns, the more chance there is that someone will see the light.
2) You can't make someone else look stupid, you can only uncover the light of their burning stupidity for the world to see.
3) It may be a strain to remain polite to the online idiots, but at least you can sometimes tell the truth -- unlike with, say, your management or your son's girlfriend.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | July 19, 2008 5:14 PM
He can haves our cheessse when he prisesss it from our cold dead handses, Preciousss.
Posted by: Em | July 19, 2008 5:59 PM
He cantsss have my chessse. My chessse is holy.
Itsss edam.
Posted by: Dedj | July 19, 2008 6:09 PM
Well, hopefully within the next 10-20 years, aluminum will be out of vaccines anyway. Not that it's not safe, it's just primarily a Th2 inducer, which is not the most effective way of stimulating the immune system to respond to pathogens like bacteria and viruses (the Th2 response is really more for parasites). And they'll be more 'natural' - or at least sound that way. CpG oligonucleotide derivatives? You have nucleotides in your DNA! GMCSF/Ifn-g antigenic liposomes? Those are natural cytokines your body produces!
But I'm not taking bets that this will change anything. Actually, to take a page out of their book, a GMCSF-antigen liposome will be derided as "Liposomes are made out of lipids! Lipids make people fat! And GMCSF is used in chemotherapy!"
Posted by: Brian | July 19, 2008 7:12 PM
The trauma of vaccination in childhood can cause the false memory of alien abduction in adults many years latter.
Posted by: Dr. SciFi | July 19, 2008 7:37 PM
Isn't the amount of aluminum in vaccines neglible compared to what we get from deodorant and from eating food cooked in aluminum pans?
Posted by: Ace of Sevens | July 19, 2008 8:00 PM
Ace of Sevens: You are correct about the aluminum. I've been using aluminum cookware for 30 years nd ters nthng rong wid me brani (bad Saturday evening humor). I'm a clinical pathologist and know much about toxicology. The aluminum as neurotoxin claims always annoyed me, since there was never evidence that aluminum was toxic.)
Unfortunately, throughout the history of medicine in the U.S., there have been physicians more interested in fame and wealth than in improving the health of patients. Dr. Gordon is just one more name on a long list of such doctors. Perhaps someone should try the conflict of interest ploy on him: Dr. Gordon, doesn't your disparagement of vaccines mean that you will get more business when non-vaccinated kids get mumps, measles, pertussis, rubella, tetanus, etc.?
Posted by: Dr. T | July 19, 2008 8:27 PM
Skeptico - The big difference is not the route that the virus takes, but the quantity of virus. When you have natural measles, you have virus partying and replicating in cells all over your body ... the viral load is significantly greater, so you have a stronger antibody response.
Vaccines are calibrated to give "enough" immunity to prevent a clinical infection if the person is exposed to wild virus, and a booster shot in 10-15 years is not evidence of failure. An occasional mild case of the disease is not a failure either.
If you give a huge load of antigen, the swelling, pain and fever as the immune system reacts are more severe.
Posted by: Tsu Dho Nimh | July 19, 2008 9:14 PM
Felicia's House of Suntans and Wellness?
Nomad, please tell me you're making that up.
I wonder what else is in the good doctor's new parent kit. A brochure about the secret lethality of carseats? A recipe for homebrewed baby formula sweetened with honey?
Posted by: isles | July 19, 2008 9:19 PM
Yup. It's the sort of journalistic play-it-safe cowardly mindset that Paul Krugman, only half-jokingly, predicted would lead to headlines like "Shape of Earth: Views Differ".
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | July 19, 2008 9:27 PM
actually, there are already huge wastes of energy by the alt-med fanboys/fangirls in the sectors of artificial hormones. synthetic progesterone is bad, natural progesterone has NO side effects! LOL, ask a pregnant woman how that progesterone surge is treating her and see the "lack of side effects" in action!
taking this back to vaccinations, and my point: i suspect if we load synthetic cytokines to stimulate immune response- or other synthesized versions of chemicals we produce (it's been 4 years since my last immunology class and i honestly slept through it, apologies), that we'll get the same reaction. synthetic kills, natural has NO side effects.
the issue is that there will always be an issue.
Posted by: leigh | July 19, 2008 10:32 PM
I guess Jay's got his crosshairs on Warren Buffet and Dairy Queen.
mmm, Blizzards.
Posted by: Hey Zeus is my Homeboy | July 19, 2008 10:37 PM
I thoughts the holey cheese was Swiss(ssss).
Posted by: Kell From Azh | July 19, 2008 11:44 PM
That piece gives Jay Gordon's job as "Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, UCLA Medical School". He's not listed on their website. (I'm looking at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA: I assume its on the only medical school there!)
Posted by: Heraclides | July 19, 2008 11:59 PM
"I don't know how you can stomach it day after day Orac. Obviously a voice of reason needs to exist but if I come across the stupid (say, a reiki vs. quantum touch discussion on an aromatherapy board) I fight the urge to troll, read half a page and close the page because I know the frustration is futile.
I guess blogging with the insolence is catharsis in a way but you must get.. so.. fucking.. tired."
I must say that as a professional scientist, but in a field about as removed from medicine as you can get (I'm in the atmopsheric and physical sciences) I find Orac's take downs very usefull. While I'm educated enough to spot the really, really stupid outburst (such as cooler's drivel) with ease, I'm really lost when it comes to some of the more technical, jargonistic arguments put forward. That said, I'm unlikely to be swayed by most of the anti-vax crowd anyway, but I still like having someone with indpeth knowledge of medicine spell it out to me.
So take it from me Mr. Orac, your efforts are helpful to at least one person.
Posted by: ChrisC | July 20, 2008 12:03 AM
Isles, there isn't a "Felicia's House of Suntans and Wellness"
http://www.santamonicawellness.com/
but Dr. Gordon is probably willing to agree to moms making their own formulas with raw honey and organic dolphin milk if they don't want to breastfeed for the same reason Jenny didn't breastfeed, because they have silicone breast implants and are sure that they will leak unspecified bad junk into the breast milk. Considering his locale, 100% of his patient's mothers may have breast implants, come to think of it. Maybe Dr. Gordon would like to tell us how many of his patients are crystal and indigo children?
Dr. Gordon has a link to PETA on his website for information about milk and a reference to Seinfeld. Maybe he had a bad experience with milk as a child. He's also not keen on fluoride.
Orac, he's still an HIV denialist.
http://www.drjaygordon.com/development/alternative/hiv.asp
Posted by: Nomad | July 20, 2008 12:17 AM
Cooter claimed: "if you look at the amish unvaccianted population as a whole they dont get autism"
Can you provide a link to the scientific literature that confirms this, it sounds interesting.
Posted by: Zeebo | July 20, 2008 3:00 AM
He can't - there isn't one. "The Amish don't vaccinate and they don't have autism" is simply a lie.
Posted by: sophia8 | July 20, 2008 6:41 AM
C'mon, leigh - I looked at your blog and you're staining with antibodies. You needed GMCSF and interferon to get those antibodies. If you don't know what CD30340 is, you're not a biologist ;)
But you did hit on the thing that I forgot. Anything that any pharmaceutical company makes is by definition unnatural.
Posted by: Brian | July 20, 2008 7:49 AM
He's probably right about one thing -- lots of people would be healthier if they gave up dairy products, or at least cut down by a whole lot, since adult lactase persistence is the exception, not the rule, in many human population groups. (Cheese still has enough lactose in it to bother some people.)
Dairy product overuse is about the one thing I agree with PETA on, albeit for entirely different reasons, PETA being morons and all (but a stopped clock is right twice a day). I guess by that metric we can say that both PETA and Dr. Gordon are dumber than stopped clocks.
Posted by: Interrobang | July 20, 2008 12:34 PM
There's something gravely messed up about an HIV denialist/anti vax/homeopathy promoting pediatrician. Criminally irresponsible, I would think.
Posted by: Nico | July 20, 2008 2:09 PM
That piece gives Jay Gordon's job as "Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, UCLA Medical School". He's not listed on their website. (I'm looking at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA: I assume its on the only medical school there!)
-------------------------------
I looked through the UCLA site (school & clinic)and searched under "Jay", "Gordon", "Jay Gordon". Nada.
(But I did find this from 1994, so Dr. Gordon may be resting on past laurels and extrapolating current hospital privileges.)
Cover Story Take Two Herbs and Call Me in the Morning Health: Your child is teething or has an earache?
LA Times May 15, 1994
PHOTO: Pediatrician [Jay Gordon], a self-taught homeopathic, talks with [Gail Gutierrez] and her son, [Daniel], about treating the boy's ear infection with homeopathic eardrops.
"Half of my practice turns to homeopathy," said Dr. Jay Gordon, ... a Santa Monica pediatrician and assistant clinical professor at UCLA Medical School..."
Between the homeopathy and the Maggione story, I am wondering why people and the media are listening to this guy. Cheese, ice cream...rriigghhtt.
Posted by: Regan | July 20, 2008 2:49 PM
"I looked through the UCLA site (school & clinic)and searched under "Jay", "Gordon", "Jay Gordon". Nada."
Yeah, me too.
He still works at a hospital?! If so, ouch.
Posted by: Heraclides | July 20, 2008 10:50 PM
Did you hear that Generation Rescue had a fund raiser in Hollywood and Britney Spears (older sister of 17 year old mom, Jamie Lynn) showed up to support their antivaccine goals. I was shocked to hear that Hugh Hefner also showed up with his Gardasil Girls (TM). I hear that someone told him that GR was against girls and boys getting the Gardasil vaccine to prevent them from getting genital herpes and cancer, but Hugh's hearing went a few years ago and he thought that Jenny McCarthy was hosting a benefit to pay for Gardasil for preschoolers. A natural mistake. But embarassing for Hef and the Gardasil Girls (TM), not to mention for GR.
A photo of Hef and his girls.
http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/4/7/20/f_hughandgardm_bcb3635.gif&srv=img37
Posted by: Age of Awtizm | July 21, 2008 4:17 AM
Dr. Scifi: "The trauma of vaccination in childhood can cause the false memory of alien abduction in adults many years latter."
Actually I had a very good memory of getting my 5 year old shots. They adminstered them at the local Headstart where I was enrolled. The local paper wanted a cute pic of a kid getting his shots. However, being 5 we were not so happy to participate in public health efforts so every kid kept squirming and bawling. The photographer (who had wasted half a roll of film already) said to all of us that if one of us didn't cry he would get his picture in the paper.
I was *fascinated* by the idea of being in the paper. So I walked up to the nurse, sat down (unrestrained), and got my shot with a big semi-toothed smile on my face... and made the front page (top fold) of the local paper (which I still have).
Though I was abducted by aliens around 18 months... I wonder if that was related?
Posted by: NickG | July 21, 2008 4:44 AM
I thought aluminum was linked to Alzheimer's, or something similar...
That said, I don't see how the tiny amount in a few shots or even a dozen shots can matter. Especially when compared to how much people get from antiperspirants - which is in what context I heard the "OH NOES, aluminum!" comment.
Posted by: Rr | July 21, 2008 11:40 AM
durr.. Sorry about that.
Posted by: Rr | July 21, 2008 12:07 PM
"Actually, he may be technically correct on that one. Polio at its worst only killed a few thousand a year in the USA, and the consequences of obesity easily top that today."
You're comparing apples and oranges. All of those polio deaths were directly caused by polio. Obesity related deaths aren't directly caused by eating dairy. Obesity itself isn't even caused directly by eating dairy.
Posted by: Natalie | July 21, 2008 12:25 PM
Dave,
Being nasty and disdainful doesn't make you right. It just means you're willing to be anonymously nasty.
People like you are dangerous because you feel comfortable dismissing other's points of view and further polarize an important discussion of the safety and efficacy of vaccinations.
Jay Gordon
Posted by: Jay Gordon | July 21, 2008 1:01 PM
Jay-
Quacks like you are dangerous because your baseless point of view will lead to a drastic insult to public health.
Tell me which is worse: dismissing baseless lies and arrogance or a resurgence of lethal diseases?
Posted by: Jesse | July 21, 2008 1:28 PM
Why are you whining about Orac's style? You should be addressing his substance.
Orac is right because the data thus far says he is. Dispute the data.
Posted by: Bronze Dog | July 21, 2008 1:35 PM
So Jay shows up!
whoopie.
Jay, please cite the publications that support any of the claims you make about vaccinations. Also, just for grins, throw in a few that show homompaths are providing anything more useful than water.
Posted by: Jim | July 21, 2008 1:48 PM
Folks, I suspect that Dr. Jay has left the building.
Seriously, though - you don't expect him to stick around and go toe-to-toe with people who know more about biology, medicine and science and general than he does, do you?
Just remember how Dr. Jay didn't believe that HIV (the virus) caused AIDS until he had a patient who died from it. From what I see on his website, he still thinks that HIV is not a sufficient cause, just "a factor".
Come on, folks - "practitioners" like Dr. Jay can't be bothered with data and all that "sciency" stuff - they are more into their "gut feelings" and the "narratives" their patients relate, not to mention whatever is hip, cool or new (as long as it has nothing to do with science). Expecting him to stick around and support his "beliefs" about medicine is like asking the Pope to give data supporting his belief in God.
No, Dr. Jay is much better suited for petulantly pointing out how "mean-spirited" and "dismissive" other people are when they refuse to be "inclusive" about his "other ways of knowing". In other words, if you don't buy his line of BS, he's going to pack up his carpet bag and huff off.
Prometheus
Posted by: Proemtheus | July 21, 2008 2:30 PM
Didn't Dr. Jay and Heidi Fleiss' dad say that infant formula was so dangerous it should only be given by prescription?
Posted by: notmercury | July 21, 2008 2:33 PM
People like you are dangerous because you feel comfortable dismissing other's points of view and further polarize an important discussion of the safety and efficacy of vaccinations.
My irony meter just pegged.
Posted by: Regan | July 21, 2008 3:55 PM
So, Flash Gordon, what's up with the UCLA thing? Are you an assistant professor of pediatrics at UCLA medical school? Which hospital(s) do you have priveleges at?
Posted by: Meany Ming | July 21, 2008 5:12 PM
Dr. Jay Gordon said (paraphrased) "wah, wah... Orac is being mean to me"
Oh, cry us a river and come up with some answers to these two questions:
1) What real evidence is there that the MMR which has been around since 1971 and has never contained thimerosal is more dangerous than measles, mumps or rubella?
2) What real evidence is there that the DTaP is riskier than diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis?
Posted by: HCN | July 21, 2008 5:18 PM
Jay, Jay, Jay, Jay.
Obviously I'm not "anonymous" to you. Actually, I'm not "anonymous" to a lot of my readers.
In any case, it's impossible to resist pointing out that whining about how "mean" and "nasty" I supposedly am does not make you right, either, especially since you still can't produce any evidence to support your assertions. Do you think being "nicer" than me somehow renders you magically immune from being expected to produce data to defend your assertions? Besides, didn't you write on a certain e-mail list that you "responded too moderately and too conversationally" in the article I deconstructed above? Sure, you did. I guess your inherent "niceness" kept you from saying what you really think in that Cookie interview.
I have no such compunction--at least when it comes to you anymore. (For why, see below.) Indeed, I responded to your last e-mail with a pointed but polite request for some evidence to support what you said at the "Green Our Vaccines" rally and in your video. Your lack of response led me to believe that being nice wasn't cutting it. Tell you what, though. I'll take the "anonymity" excuse away from you. If I post my criticisms of you on a forum where I use my real name, will you respond? Come on, what do you say? I was thinking...perhaps next Monday.
I even promise to be "nice" (well, for the most part, anyway).
My irony meter just exploded. You owe me a new one.
I'm "dangerous"? Dr. Jay, with all due respect, I'm not the one spreading ignorant misinformation about vaccines that most first year medical students would know better than to spout. I'm not the one who's fear-mongering about vaccines, the medical intervention that has arguably saved more lives than all other medical interventions combined. I'm not the one who's making demonstrably incorrect statements that run the risk of decreasing vaccination rates and contributing to a public health disaster in the form of a return of vaccine-preventable diseases.
You are, Dr. Gordon. You are. And over the last three years I have come to view your spreading of misinformation about vaccines as a profound betrayal of the Hippocratic Oath that we both took. Sorry if my saying so that bluntly hurts your feelings or makes you mad, but that's the way I view it.
Worse, some of the demonstrably incorrect things you're saying are really, really dumb--so dumb that even now I have a hard time believing that you actually said them. I'm still shaking my head in disbelief, three days later. Whatever our disagreements, I thought you were smarter than that. I really did. I also really meant it when I asked you to take it as some friendly advice not to use the "formaldehyde" gambit again. It does make you look incredibly ignorant, and I really don't want that.
I mean, really, Dr. Jay. Formaldehyde? You've got to be kidding! I'm sorry, I used to have a modicum of respect for you, believe it or not. I actually thought that you were at least semi-reasonable, just misguided. However, you've just proven me wrong. Any medical professional who can actually mention formaldehyde in vaccines with a straight face as though it's likely to cause autism or have a major effect on human health has, IMHO, forfeited the right to be treated with collegial respect, because a medical professional should know that that particular gambit is utter B.S. That you either do not know or (even worse if true) do not care suggests to me that mockery is the only appropriate remaining response. I suppose I should be grateful that you restrained yourself and didn't pull the "fetal parts" or "monkey kidneys" gambit that anti-vaccine propaganda so likes.
Still, if my "anonymity" is all that keeps you from answering my requests for evidence, there is another venue where I use my real name. I could post there a comprehensive discussion of your errors of reason, science, and fact. You could try to refute me if you can.
Posted by: Orac | July 21, 2008 5:36 PM
I get the "anonymity" gambit all the time, typically from people who already know my name. Gordon won't be back. The jig is up for him, just as it for the anti-vaccine movement in general.
Posted by: AutismNewsBeat | July 21, 2008 6:12 PM
Doctor "too little, too late"!
It seems to me that once you start flirting with HIV Denialism and anti-vaccine quackery that you have to accept the consequences of your actions.
Posted by: Chris Noble | July 21, 2008 9:22 PM
As to the UCLA thing, Jay Gordon could be an assistant clinical professor for the med school there. Lots of doctors are clinical professors. It's not exactly a big thing, you just get a title and are paid a couple hundred bucks a day to let a med student follow you around. You get a little more if you give a lecture during their rotation. It sounds way more impressive than it actually is.
Posted by: anonimouse | July 21, 2008 11:13 PM
Dr Gordon,
I'm parent to an autistic child. I'd like you to know that I am sickened by your behaviour and thank my lucky starts that there is a very large body of water between us so that you can do no harm to the children of the country I live in.
I think