Respectful Insolence

The utter discrediting and disgrace of Andrew Wakefield, first by the judgment of the General Medical Council against him and then by the retraction of the crown jewel of his respectability his 1998 Lancet paper that sparked the modern anti-vaccine movement and launched a thousand autism quacks. The reaction of the anti-vaccine loons was very predictable, with Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey producing a hilariously paranoid conspiracy theory and J.B. Handley following suit with more monkey business. Truly, the downfall of their hero, which has been a long time in coming but has finally arrived. Indeed, even his latest “respectable” study has now bitten the dust.

Latest to weigh in is–surprise! surprise!–Ginger Taylor, who appears to be vying with J.B. and his dim-witted celebrity spokescelebrities for making up some truly fine conspiracies. In this case, she’s gone J.B. and J & J one better in that she’s drawn up a flowsheet of paranoia, prefacing it with:

Also fascinating that they have tried to portray Wakefield as the guy that invented the autism/vaccine connection, despite the fact that Leo Kanner reported that one of his first 11 cases in the 1940′s was a regression following a smallpox vaccine, the VCIP has been paying autism cases for 25 years, and I first heard about the connection in my undergrad psych program in 1988 at George Mason University, so that they can use this GMC hearing to declare the vaccine controversy over. (I have forty or so studies on my “no evidence of any link” page supporting the vaccine/autism connection and I have never even had Wakefield’s MMR paper up there.

Actually, no one knowledgeable about the vaccine-autism scare thinks that Wakefield started it. He did, however, popularize it in the U.K.and, arguably more than anyone else, is responsible for the surge in anti-vaccine quackery that erupted during the last decade.

In any case, I have a word of advice for Ginger, as she is a rank amateur at constructing really good conspiracy theories. After all, she forgot the Illuminati, David Icke’s reptilians, and the Masons, for starters. Then there has to be a link to 9/11, of course, and a link to aliens.

I also have a message from my vaccine overlords to Ginger: Don’t worry. You’ll soon be silenced. I have used my big pharma connections (generous rewards for being such a humble and reliable servant) to ask Glaxo-Smith-Kline to send its black helicopter over to pick you up. My vaccine overlords were more than happy to oblige.

No need for Ginger to thank me. It was my pleasure.

Comments

  1. #1 Anthro
    February 13, 2010

    Good one! And ever so insolent.

    Do they (the collective opposition) ever offer any proof that you are tied to “Big Pharma”?

  2. #2 DrRachie
    February 13, 2010

    What I particularly like about this is the inclusion of the Department of Defence, out on the side, all by itself. Paranoid much? Weird. I’m heading back to the spider for further instructions. Where’s my chemtrail plane?

  3. #3 Joseph
    February 13, 2010

    LOL. She’s really gone off the deep end, hasn’t she? On the other hand, for a long time I’ve thought of Ginger as someone who simply makes stuff up. I can’t decide.

  4. #4 MikeMa
    February 13, 2010

    The flowchart is on version 1.5. Yikes.

    Missing is Wakefield’s competing vaccine and a line from that 20 billion in profit direct to Wakefield himself. The trial lawyers and their money seem to have been left out too. Looks like we need version 1.6.

  5. #5 Pablo
    February 13, 2010

    Missing is Wakefield’s competing vaccine and a line from that 20 billion in profit direct to Wakefield himself. The trial lawyers and their money seem to have been left out too. Looks like we need version 1.6.

    I keep wondering this. When did Wakefield become anti-vax? Because as far as I know, his original paper was absolutely NOT anti-vax overall, just anti-MMR, because that was going to open the door for his own, separate vaccine.

    He was, at least then, a big vaccine pusher. So why do the anti-vaxxers rally behind him?

  6. #6 Dangerous Bacon
    February 13, 2010

    A conspiracy flowchart without the Queen of England, Donald Rumsfeld and the Neocons is woefully incomplete. And why isn’t Orac on there as a “lapdog” along with Paul Offit?

    Could someone be paying Ginger to leave the real villains off the list? Might she be deliberately drawing suspicion away from the worst conspirators?

    Just asking questions here.

  7. #7 Do'C
    February 13, 2010

    Ginger:

    “…the VCIP has been paying autism cases for 25 years…”

    Have there been autistic NVICP cases? Yes.

    “In each of the above-listed cases, the autism diagnosis followed the development or aggravation of profoundly disabling physical conditions.”

    http://tinyurl.com/cyod28

    Total payments for “autism cases” by the NVICP?

    ZERO

    http://tinyurl.com/ykcx9ey

    See section II “Adjudications”

  8. #8 Skeptico
    February 13, 2010

    Yeah you should complain that you’re not on the flowchart, Orac. After all your hard work for the unprincipled conglomco machine, you’d think you’d get some recognition. I guess cashing all those pharma checks will have to be enough.

    I like the way that flowchart has Andrew Wakefield at the bottom, all alone, holding the whole thing up.

  9. #9 SecularDad
    February 13, 2010

    First sign of a crank, deleting posts that are critical of her position. I even linked a David Icke article to show how helpful he could be to her. She wasn’t having any of it.

  10. #10 Pablo
    February 13, 2010

    I like the way that flowchart has Andrew Wakefield at the bottom, all alone, holding the whole thing up.

    Yeh, that’s not fair. There are a bunch of other quacks who are shunned by the establishment who should be included there, too.

  11. #11 M
    February 13, 2010

    I guess cashing all those pharma checks will have to be enough.

    However, appearing on that flow chart might have got Orac bumped up a pay grade.

    Missing is Wakefield’s competing vaccine and a line from that 20 billion in profit direct to Wakefield himself. The trial lawyers and their money seem to have been left out too. Looks like we need version 1.6.

    It is up to version 1.6 now.

    Leo Kanner reported that one of his first 11 cases in the 1940′s was a regression following a smallpox vaccine.

    We had better stop stop vaccinating children for small pox right away!! What’s that, you say – “It hasn’t been used foo years” – “eradicated”…. Never Mind

    Who is this Ginger Taylor? What is her position in the crankoshpere?

  12. #12 MikeMa
    February 13, 2010

    Not sure what changed in version 1.6 – Dr Paul Offit added?

    I see that Ginger believes that (accurate and deserved) criticism of Wakefield = slander. Nice.

  13. #13 Orac
    February 13, 2010

    However, appearing on that flow chart might have got Orac bumped up a pay grade.

    Damn you! You’ve ruined my plan. By posting this mockery of Ginger I was hoping that she would add me to the conspiracy chart and that my pharma lords would notice and then decide to reward me richly!

    Curses!

  14. #14 Brian Deer
    February 13, 2010

    “I’ve danced with a man, who’s danced with a girl who’s danced with the Prince of Wales”

    Herbert Farjeon – 1927

  15. #15 Repod
    February 13, 2010

    I suppose David Icke has some good stories to tell about Reptilians. Few people believe him and rightfully so. There is one instance of Apache story telling that talks about driving a race of snake people underground though. One has to wonder since civilizations all throughout the world mention a reptilian race at some point in time. maybe they were all high on pot or something. Anyone remember the Lizardman of Scape Ore Swamp? If that were true, some redneck would have killed it and strapped it across the hood of his truck by now. Reptilians should not show their face in Louisiana. Those people would kill them and eat them for supper.

    Conspiracy theories abound everywhere. Ever heard of the alien/Nazi moon bases?

    One of the best conspiracy people I know of is Louis Farrakhan. That guy is a genuine nutjob.

    I wouldn’t calle McCarthy a conspiracy theorist though. Vaccines can be as dangerous as the the disease they are supposed to protect against. I sure as hell am not taking a vaccine of any kind.

  16. #16 Travis
    February 13, 2010

    “Vaccines can be as dangerous as the the disease they are supposed to protect against.” – [Citation Needed]

    If you are just indicating that it is possible to have very bad side effects, possibly very bad ones, then this is true. But everyone who knows anything about vaccines knows that already. But to not take vaccines because of that would be silly. The benefits outweigh the risks for the most part.

    If what you meant was that they are somehow more dangerous overall then I think you need to put some evidence forward. There is a lot of evidence against you on this. Vaccines have helped make many diseases nearly disappear.

  17. #17 Greg Fish
    February 13, 2010

    After all, she forgot the Illuminati, David Icke’s reptilians, and the Masons, for starters. Then there has to be a link to 9/11, of course, and a link to aliens.

    Actually, the vaccine link to the reptilians is pure Icke too. He was even a source for Meryl Dorey…

    http://worldofweirdthings.com/2009/09/17/david-ickes-warning-about-flu-vaccines/

  18. #18 Otto
    February 13, 2010

    @DrRachie: “I’m heading back to the spider for further instructions.”

    That’s Chondu the Mystic to you, missy: http://bit.ly/b266gx

  19. #19 isles
    February 13, 2010

    What is the word for people’s tendency to see patterns or connections even when they aren’t really there?

    It’s hilarious that Ginger has gone so far as to actually map out her paranoid fantasy. I’m sure she’s enormously proud of herself.

  20. #20 Moopheus
    February 13, 2010

    “Ever heard of the alien/Nazi moon bases?”

    Oh, yeah, that’s a good one, along with the tangentially related nazi/alien/hollow earth theory.

    Remember, we never went to the moon. And when we did, we found alien bases there!

  21. #21 Corina Becker
    February 13, 2010

    I love it how, when a commenter asked for where she got the $20 Billion figure, she references an article…. that doesn’t have any reference of where they’re getting that figure from. It just seems to appear out of thin air!

  22. #22 Antaeus Feldspar
    February 13, 2010

    He was, at least then, a big vaccine pusher. So why do the anti-vaxxers rally behind him?

    Two reasons, Pablo:

    1) Many anti-vaxxers actually believe Wakefield’s lie to them that he actually never planned a competing measles vaccine. Wakefield or one of his useful idiots tells them that Wakefield’s patent was for a “therapeutic composition” and everything that’s been said about Wakefield having a rival vaccine is a lie by “the vaccine pushers”.

    Of course, if those anti-vaxxers weren’t gullible, they could check for themselves. They would find that Andrew Wakefield’s application for what would become US Patent 6534259 very clearly begins:

    The present invention relates to a new vaccine/immunisation for the prevention and/or prophylaxis against measles virus infection and to a pharmaceutical or therapeutic composition …

    But many of them are just too gullible to check for themselves, and so they’ll continue to be fooled.

    2) Anti-vaxxers, like members of any other cult, tend to assign “right” and “wrong” to people and groups first, and then ‘reason’ from that starting point about what actions are right and wrong. A person or group that has been assigned the status of “right” can do almost anything they want and that action will be “right” … even if that’s the very same action the cultist tells you makes The Other a “wrong” person. You could call it the genetic fallacy of morality.

    Thus, all vaccines made by vaccine manufacturers are automatically bad, unsafe vaccines because all vaccine manufacturers are part of Big Pharma. But since Wakefield is a Brave Maverick Doctor, anything he does must be good. Therefore a vaccine made by him must be good and effective and safe, unlike those other vaccines made by people who haven’t been assigned moral superiority.

  23. #23 Enkidu
    February 13, 2010

    Love this comment on Ginger’s post: “Yes, Ginger, you are right about the lack of raging epidemics. I was a child in the 1950s. Knew hundreds of children because we moved all the time and I never knew a single child hospitalized for any childhood illness. Vaccines available? DTP and smallpox. Later polio.”

    He must have been quite the pen pal to keep tabs on so many acquaintances.

  24. #24 Phoenix Woman
    February 13, 2010

    “What is the word for people’s tendency to see patterns or connections even when they aren’t really there?”

    There are a few different words for this sort of thing:

    “Clustering illusion” is one (well, two, actually). But “pareidolia” is probably the one you have in mind.

  25. #25 Grim
    February 13, 2010

    Dangerous Bacon @6

    And what about the Bilderbergers ? Has everyone forgotten about the Bilderbergers ?

  26. #26 Sullivan
    February 13, 2010

    1.6 corrected a misspelled word.

    Can anyone find a statement by Wakefield or any of the co-authors yet? Is this defense all supporters and no leaders?

  27. #27 cryshame
    February 14, 2010

    Brain, she only gone and taken a copyright chart off you website on the workings of Welcome in 1994.
    http://briandeer.com/septrin/wellcome-trust.htm
    If I were you I would demand she take it down.

  28. #28 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    People like you are quite funny…. You protest and gloat over a withdrawal of a paper in the Lancet which states exactly this:

    “We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described. Virological studies are underway that may help to resolve this issue.

    Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine”.

    I guess it’s a horrible thing now to say that we didn’t prove anything here but more examination is needed. Wow. Wacky stuff from the Wackosphere…

  29. #29 MikeMa
    February 14, 2010

    Wackosphere
    It does seem like you support St Andy and his pseudo research. The Lancet is protecting it’s lapsed rep over this travesty. The GMC was more succinct. Wakefield is a fraud.

  30. #30 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @MikeMa

    Of course I support Wakefield. His paper remained open-ended. The last time I checked it wasn’t wrong to suggest a possible trigger and ask for more research to be done. Apparently the Wackosphere (that’s you guys) think otherwise. That’s too bad. The main issue is that there’s no way that one man (Wakefield) was/is able to convince people that his idea is correct… It’s the families and the relatives and the friends of the victims (those injured by vaccines) who are the ones who make the point about the dangers of vaccinations for many children. It’s really that simple.

    You can condemn Wakefield all you want… it just shows your ignorance as to the way that this idea has spread… It isn’t about Wakefield… it’s about vaccines being dangerous for a subset of children.

  31. #31 MikeMa
    February 14, 2010

    Wakefield’s ideas were spread by his lies and trial lawyer funded research. His motive was and still is greed. Very few children have been proven to have suffered from vaccines. Many more have been proven to suffer from vaccine preventable disease. Believe what you like about St Andy. In a just world he’d be on trial for murder.

  32. #32 Orac
    February 14, 2010

    Of course I support Wakefield. His paper remained open-ended. The last time I checked it wasn’t wrong to suggest a possible trigger and ask for more research to be done. Apparently the Wackosphere (that’s you guys) think otherwise.

    Of course you do. However, it is wrong to suggest a possible trigger based on bad science, funded by lawyers, incompetently carried out, that subjected children to unnecessary invasive medical procedures, which is what Wakefield did.

  33. #33 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @MikeMa

    “His motive was and still is greed”.

    I would disagree (re: greed) but nonetheless it isn’t about Wakefield so much as it is about the children who have GI distress and other very serious problems AFTER the mmr vaccine. That’s the issue … Again, you can whine about Wakefield all day long it doesn’t change the fact that some children have very adverse reactions to the mmr vaccine.

    If you want to discuss greed though… Ask Orac to open a discussion about Paul (Pr)Offit.

    “In a just world he’d be on trial for murder”.

    Don’t know if you’d want to go there Mike… There could be a plethora of doctors who could be brought up on murder charges for dispensing vaccines in an unsafe manner. Be careful what you wish for…

  34. #34 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @Orac

    “Of course you do. However, it is wrong to suggest a possible trigger based on bad science, funded by lawyers, incompetently carried out, that subjected children to unnecessary invasive medical procedures, which is what Wakefield did”.

    As you well know the parents whose children were subjected to these ‘invasive medical procedures’ do not have a problem with Wakefield. Their children were suffering and were not being helped. Also, keep in mind that some of those oh so horrible ‘invasive medical procedures’ are now standard practice for the presenting GI problems that the children had…. so, nice try… Wakefield was just ahead of his time… :)

  35. #35 Orac
    February 14, 2010

    As you well know the parents whose children were subjected to these ‘invasive medical procedures’ do not have a problem with Wakefield.

    Completely irrelevant. Children are not parents’ property. The parents have no more right to subject their children to unnecessary invasive medical procedures than physicians have to do them. The difference is that physicians should know better and that they are ethically bound by their code of professional ethics not to do unnecessary invasive procedures that do not benefit patients for research purposes.

  36. #36 DLC
    February 14, 2010

    Wow. Wacko, do you actually know how to read for comprehension? Wakefield’s 1998 study was not just faulty, Wakefield himself was at fault. The study is a bunch of bollocks! get it? Wakefield cooked the books! Holy Hell man! what else do you need ? Do I need to resort to John Cleese-esque language relating to Wakefield’s dead parrot ?
    It’s gone, bereft of credibility it lies there providing only cover for anti-vaccine nuts and autism quacks. It’s not just tired after a long squawk, it’s ceased to be! retracted from publication and joined the choir invisible! It is an Ex-Study! And for good reasons!
    It’s not just that he failed to disclose conflicts of interest, he fabricated his results! How messed up does it have to be before you agree that it’s not proper science and drop it ? Look mate, go on and think what you will of vaccines, Me, Orac or the little man behind the curtain, but at least come close enough to reality to realize that Wakefield’s 1998 paper should never have been published, and was retracted from The Lancet for good reason.

  37. #37 MikeMa
    February 14, 2010

    Wakefield’s 12 cherry picked GI sufferers might have provided a useful start to real research. His sample size was too small. His data ignored facts when no mmr was found. In short, his pseudo research set back any effort to help these children.

    As for comparing Dr Offit & St Andy, one used his medical knowledge to provide a reduction in pain and suffering. The other lied and falsified data to promote himself and others financial interests.

    As with any advance in medical science there are risks to weigh against the positives. If Dr Offit’s vaccine has caused harm, that harm will be evaluated and used to scientifically adjust the risk assessment. St. Andy, on the other hand used tricks and fraud to cause death and suffering of many children in his quest for profit. He’s still doing it. Offit vs Wakefield: Reduce worldwide suffering vs increase worldwide suffering. You bet your way and I’ll bet mine.

  38. #38 Denice Walter
    February 14, 2010

    Happy St.Valentine’s Day to my Illuminati-Mason Brothers and Sister Handmaidens!**May the Light of Wisdom eternally illuminate you and the Eastern Star always shine upon you!May All the Mysteries of the Night be revealed to you and the Riches of the Ancients be bestowed unto you! We have *all* served well!**(While I’m not a sexist, Our Esteemed Over *Lords* are!)

  39. #39 Bronze Dog
    February 14, 2010

    Children are not parents’ property.

    That’s something that really needs to be drilled into a lot of altie heads.

  40. #40 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @Orac

    “The parents have no more right to subject their children to unnecessary invasive medical procedures than physicians have to do them”.

    Why don’t you address the fact that these so-called ‘unnecessary invasive medical procedures’ are now standard course of action taken with children who have some of the same GI problems that those children had? I suppose that you think that it would have been (or is) better for medical professionals to just ignore GI distress because doing something may be ‘too invasive’ for the child. I disagree.

    You stick with the mainstream line of prescribing anti-psychotics to children with autism, Orac. Let’s see how that works out for those kids…

  41. #41 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @DLC

    Nice rant, dude. None of it is even worth quoting. I’m not sure how to be more clear so let’s try this again. Tell me where I am losing you…

    You can cry and whine all day about Wakefield. I couldn’t care less. The issue is whether or not the mmr causes GI problems in children and if it relates to their subsequent diagnosis of autism. Wakefield didn’t ‘fabricate’ the issue or make up the idea out of the clear blue. Putting Wakefield aside, the issue remains.

    So, go ahead and continue your whine-fest about Wakefield…. No one cares. We’re beyond that… If you want to continue making it all about how awful Wakefield… that’s your own issue… perhaps you should see a psychologist about why you can’t move on from that … Maybe he/she will prescribe some anti-psych meds for you.

  42. #42 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @MikeMa

    “Wakefield’s 12 cherry picked GI sufferers might have provided a useful start to real research. His sample size was too small”.

    Ok… so what about Wakefield’s discussion in the paper which stated:

    “Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine”.

    There you go… He asks for more real research to be done. What’s your issue?

    “As for comparing Dr Offit & St Andy, one used his medical knowledge to provide a reduction in pain and suffering. The other lied and falsified data to promote himself and others financial interests”.

    Um, interesting. I believe that Dr. Wakefield is actually helping to reduce pain and suffering in children with autism. What has St. (Pr)Offit done for children with autism? As for financial interests… that’s hilarious. St. (Pr)Offit is the one making Millions off his vaccines… Not Wakefield… You’re nuts if you actually believe that (Pr)Offit’s motives are pure… Please get your head examined.

  43. #43 Glaxo PharmaBase 7
    February 14, 2010

    MESSAGE BEGINS

    Lackeys, Shills and Tools:

    To our minions worldwide (and offworld), you have done well. We have dispatched Obsidian 4 to apprehend the rebel known as “Ginger”. Her vaccine-altered changeling has been invaluable in revealing rebel plans and will continue to gather data in realtime onsite.

    Orac, you are as one of our own hatchlings to us. Your relentless pursuit of the rebels is most gratifying to watch. Expect the new Aston-Martin DB9 as requested within the week.

    Rachie, your domination of the southern hemisphere continues to gratify us. You will find a token of our esteem moored at the Royal Prince Alfred Yacht club.

    Antaeus, your isolence is strong and you have irritated the rebels with facts and snark on a consistent basis. You are promoted to Glaxon 3, with syringe clusters.

    As for the Dangerous Bacon unit, the objects you requested, though puzzling to us, are on their way to you. You have done well.

    But enough of praise. We have not seen this rebel “Orac’s Wackosphere” before. It is cagey and clearly onto us. This must not stand. We suggest that you continue mocking it. Obsidian 2 is returning from Zeta Reticuli 4, so we have emplaced thimerocite spondors in its nest for now, so please monitor telemetry closely for the next cycle. We shall await your recommendations.

    In closing, we are pleased that Wakefield has been crushed. Those responsible for the Lancet article have been assimilated and recast. The bloated, confused Dorey is in retreat.

    The Rachie unit has defeated our nemeses Mercola and Adams in the all-important public portion of the Twitter Incident.

    Everything is going exactly according to our plan . . .

    I will be regenerating in the shedding vat for the next 36 hours, so contact Cindy if you need anything.

    MESSAGE ENDS

    Lord Draconis Zeneca, VC, iH7L
    PharmaCOM Orbital HQ
    0010101101001

  44. #44 sausage
    February 14, 2010

    Brian
    you better get over there she’s stolen a chart from your website ;-)

  45. #45 Militant Agnostic
    February 14, 2010

    Glaxo Pharmbase 7 – Since Orac is from Michigan, I think a Ford GT would be much more appropriate than an Aston Martin DB9. I think the latter should go to Ben Goldacre.

  46. #46 Science Mom
    February 14, 2010

    Why don’t you address the fact that these so-called ‘unnecessary invasive medical procedures’ are now standard course of action taken with children who have some of the same GI problems that those children had?

    I’m afraid you simply don’t understand the distinction between ‘clinically indicated’ and ‘fishing expedition’. The latter being what Wakefield et al. did. At least 4 children from that Lancet study did not have gut pathology and the GMC found the charges as such against those 3 good doctors, proved.

    “Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine”.

    There you go… He asks for more real research to be done. What’s your issue?

    The issue is, is that you have ignored his intensive media campaign that began with, “…I have to say that there is sufficient anxiety in my own mind of the safety, the long term safety of the polyvalent, that is the MMR vaccination in combination, that I think that it should be suspended in favour of the single vaccines…”

    “… the risk of this particular syndrome developing is related to the combined vaccine, the MMR…”

    “…the behavioural or developmental change tends to occur quite soon after administration, and this is where, why parents or GPs or paediatricians have been able to make the link, the association with MMR…”

    Not to mention, that the MMR jab was the only exposure that he examined in that study. Of course he couldn’t make the claim that MMR caused the GI symptoms in the children, you can’t make such statements based upon a small case series, but that didn’t stop him from doing so for the media.

    You can cry and whine all day about Wakefield. I couldn’t care less. The issue is whether or not the mmr causes GI problems in children and if it relates to their subsequent diagnosis of autism. Wakefield didn’t ‘fabricate’ the issue or make up the idea out of the clear blue. Putting Wakefield aside, the issue remains.

    You don’t seem to understand that Wakefield’s hypothesis of his new diagnosis of autistic enterocolitis was pivotal upon measles virus replicating in the guts of his test subjects. First, he didn’t consult with the children’s medical records (or did and lied about that too) for most were exhibiting signs of autism before the MMR jab. Next, he never found measles virus in the biopsy samples and was informed of this by his, then grad student, Dr. Chadwick. All he found was contamination. Now when you make a find such as what he claimed, you double and triple check your results, you sequence and register what you found; he never did this. Without the measles virus present, without corroborating medical records, his hypothesis fails, yet his lackeys are either too dumb or too mesmerised to realise this.

    Um, interesting. I believe that Dr. Wakefield is actually helping to reduce pain and suffering in children with autism. What has St. (Pr)Offit done for children with autism? As for financial interests… that’s hilarious. St. (Pr)Offit is the one making Millions off his vaccines… Not Wakefield… You’re nuts if you actually believe that (Pr)Offit’s motives are pure… Please get your head examined.

    No, Wakefield is still practising unproven, untested quackery on autistic children for a profit. As for what Dr. Offit has done? Let’s see, his book “Autism’s False Prophets” is a great service to parents of autistic children that have been saved from going down the voodoo route and he has donated all the proceedings from the book’s sales to autism research at CHOP. He made 6 million dollars from a single vaccine, not plural, and why shouldn’t he? He and his collaborators spent 20 years on the R&D for Rotateq. In what world should someone be begrudged payment for work? As for Wakers measles vaccine, his science on that one is rubbish and if he could have commercialised it, he would have.

  47. #47 Dangerous Bacon
    February 14, 2010

    “So, go ahead and continue your whine-fest about Wakefield…. No one cares. We’re beyond that…”

    So, you’re beyond all the conspiracy-laden bitching and moaning that’s saturated antivax/autism-is-vaccine-toxicity websites for weeks now? And does “beyond that” about Wakefield mean that deluded supporters will stop pumping large sums of money into his “research” at Thoughtful House?

    “Beyond that” should mean that you’ve stopped supporting this unethical profiteer and turned your efforts to finding true causes of autism and effective means of autism treatment, instead of single-minded, wrongheaded targeting of vaccines.

    Dr Offit has contributed his book profits to genuine autism research.

    What are you doing, besides going down the same tired old failed road of trying to damage an enormously successful public health initiative?

  48. #48 sausage
    February 14, 2010

    Dangerous Bacon
    take a look at the chart brian produced in 1992
    pretty wild conspiracy theory
    http://briandeer.com/septrin/wellcome-trust.jpg
    I think you should question which side he really is on… at the moment,,, looks like he could flip flop

  49. #49 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @Science Mom

    “He made 6 million dollars from a single vaccine, not plural, and why shouldn’t he? He and his collaborators spent 20 years on the R&D for Rotateq”.

    He can make 20 billion dollars from a single vaccine… I don’t give a crap. However, he should STFU when it comes to recommending vaccines and talking about how vaccines are perfectly safe and everything would be (hypothetically of course) fine and dandy for babies to get 100,000 vaccines at once, and write books about a topic he knows zero about (ie autism). Dr. (Pr)Offit is a clown. Period.

  50. #50 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @Dangerous Bacon

    “So, you’re beyond all the conspiracy-laden bitching and moaning that’s saturated antivax/autism-is-vaccine-toxicity websites for weeks now? And does “beyond that” about Wakefield mean that deluded supporters will stop pumping large sums of money into his “research” at Thoughtful House”?

    What I mean by we are ‘beyond that’ is that this retraction and the continued witch-hunt for Wakefield doesn’t change anything in terms of people’s opinions (or the science for that matter). It’s not as if all the parents of the children injured (or likely injured) by the mmr are going to say ‘oh, I see now this was a big mistake. The GMC has cleared everything right up. I feel so much better now.” Of course not. So, again… by ‘beyond that’ I just mean that there’s more to the issue than Wakefield… Some of you want to continue the bash-fest against him (which is your perogative…whatever floats your boat) but really it’s just a waste of time because obviously the science isn’t settled and more studies will be released – on both sides – and we will continue to go forward…

  51. #51 warhelmet
    February 14, 2010

    Satan’s greatest victory is convincing many people he doesn’t exist!

  52. #52 Adam_Y
    February 14, 2010

    and everything would be (hypothetically of course) fine and dandy for babies to get 100,000 vaccines at once,

    Dumbass….. Paul Offit never said that.

  53. #53 Science Mom
    February 14, 2010

    He can make 20 billion dollars from a single vaccine… I don’t give a crap.

    If that was so, then why mention it in the first place? I really do believe that you begrudge Dr. Offit for his accomplishments and have deluded yourself into thinking that Wakefield is somehow on par with him. His so-called science and ethics belie that though.

    However, he should STFU when it comes to recommending vaccines and talking about how vaccines are perfectly safe and everything would be (hypothetically of course) fine and dandy for babies to get 100,000 vaccines at once, and write books about a topic he knows zero about (ie autism). Dr. (Pr)Offit is a clown. Period.

    Hey braintrust, Dr. Offit is a paediatric infectious disease specialist, of course he is going to recommend vaccines. He also hasn’t ever said that vaccines are perfectly safe; I can pull up numerous statements by him that acknowledge risks and adverse events, you however, cannot demonstrate a single one where he has said vaccines are ‘perfectly’, i.e. flawlessly safe. It is a tired old canard that it is ‘fine and dandy’ for infants to receive 100K vaccines. Why don’t you try reading the statement in context, rather than rely upon the regurgitated tripe by your handlers: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/109/1/124 and don’t let the discussion of B-cells and T-cells throw you too much.

    Somehow, I don’t think that ‘clown’ signifies a critical or intellectual reviewer of his book. If you had read it, again instead of lapping up the pabulum your choice bloggers feed you, then you would know that it isn’t about autism per se, but rather, the myths about the vaccine-autism claims and the nefarious perpetuators of those myths.

    What I mean by we are ‘beyond that’ is that this retraction and the continued witch-hunt for Wakefield doesn’t change anything in terms of people’s opinions (or the science for that matter). It’s not as if all the parents of the children injured (or likely injured) by the mmr are going to say ‘oh, I see now this was a big mistake. The GMC has cleared everything right up. I feel so much better now.”

    I guess you weren’t paying attention; Wakefield lied and falsified his data; without his claims verified and reproduced, there is no MMR-autism causation, no matter how many parents claim that is the case. It may not change the true believers’ opinion, but they simply don’t have any scientific plausibility nor verification of their claims. Just because we don’t know all of the aetiologies of autism or genes identified, doesn’t mean we can’t rule something out and move on. This is the juncture that your lot are going to have to grasp. But if you can’t, by all means, keep producing crap studies for us to point and laugh at and use to demonstrate how not to perform a study.

  54. #54 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    “Dumbass….. Paul Offit never said that”.

    Paraphrasing…. :)

    Yes he did… dumbass.

  55. #55 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 14, 2010

    @Science Mom

    “If that was so, then why mention it in the first place?”

    Because when people here start talking conflict of interest, etc… (Pr)Offit is such an easy transition. Honestly though…I don’t give a crap about all the millions he makes from vaccines but he needs to pipe down because of his huge conflict of interest. It just makes him seem like a dope.

    “Hey braintrust, Dr. Offit is a paediatric infectious disease specialist, of course he is going to recommend vaccines”.

    Which is precisely why he should STFU in regards to autism.

    “I guess you weren’t paying attention; Wakefield lied and falsified his data; without his claims verified and reproduced, there is no MMR-autism causation, no matter how many parents claim that is the case”.

    You are the one who seems to not be paying attention. Wakefield isn’t the problem… The fact that vaccines cause autism is the problem…

  56. #56 scientizzle
    February 14, 2010

    The fact that vaccines cause autism is the problem…

    And the evidence provided for this is…?

  57. #57 Adam_Y
    February 14, 2010

    Paraphrasing…. :)

    Yes he did… dumbass.

    You weren’t paraphrasing you were building up a straw men you liar. He was pointing out how idiotic it was to say that vaccines overwhelm the immune system.

  58. #58 Adam_Y
    February 14, 2010

    Because when people here start talking conflict of interest, etc… (Pr)Offit is such an easy transition. Honestly though…I don’t give a crap about all the millions he makes from vaccines but he needs to pipe down because of his huge conflict of interest. It just makes him seem like a dope.

    So what you are saying is that any engineer that would certify something as safe has a conflict of interest because he is making money.

  59. #59 Science Mom
    February 14, 2010

    Because when people here start talking conflict of interest, etc… (Pr)Offit is such an easy transition. Honestly though…I don’t give a crap about all the millions he makes from vaccines but he needs to pipe down because of his huge conflict of interest. It just makes him seem like a dope.

    Unlike Wakefield, Dr. Offit declares his conflicts of interest and that is one of the problems (still ongoing, by the way) is that Wakefield never disclosed his conflicts of interest. Now that sounds pretty dopey to me. Are you really trying to argue that it’s perfectly fine to discuss vaccines as long as you keep your COIs hidden? The double-standard you are applying here is positively brain-damaging.

    Which is precisely why he should STFU in regards to autism.

    You do realise that Wakefield is a gut specialist and not an autism expert right?

    You are the one who seems to not be paying attention. Wakefield isn’t the problem… The fact that vaccines cause autism is the problem…

    Yes, evidence please. Wakefield is a problem because he fabricated data and created a phenomenal scare about, not only the MMR, but vaccines. A belief predicated upon a known lie, is still a fool’s endeavour, regardless of how many people believe it.

  60. #60 Broken Link
    February 14, 2010

    Anyone else get the feeling that “Orac’s Wackosphere” is none other than “Dear Leader” J. B. Handley?

  61. #61 Gil
    February 14, 2010

    “I also have a message from my vaccine overlords to Ginger: Don’t worry. You’ll soon be silenced. I have used my big pharma connections (generous rewards for being such a humble and reliable servant) to ask Glaxo-Smith-Kline to send its black helicopter over to pick you up. My vaccine overlords were more than happy to oblige.”

    I enjoy this writing style. :)

  62. #62 Science Mom
    February 14, 2010

    Anyone else get the feeling that “Orac’s Wackosphere” is none other than “Dear Leader” J. B. Handley?

    No, I don’t. If it was, I surely would have been accused of, ahem, ‘servicing’ Dr. Offit by now.

  63. #63 Ophelia
    February 15, 2010

    Dear Orac, Lord Draconis Zeneca, and other worderful beings;

    How may I, as a younger blogger, get into the lap of big pharma and such organizations? Orbital has accepted me, along with my neighbor’s cactus Frank, but I have not recevied any transmissions as of late. I will keep waiting by the docks as instructed, but it’s cold and a strange man keeps offering me pancakes.

    Sincerely,
    Ophelia

  64. #64 Militant Agnostic
    February 15, 2010

    Ophelia – Take the third pancake, but do not eat it. Instead break it open to find your secret orders.

  65. #65 Bob
    February 15, 2010

    I eagerly await the addition of Cthulhu, Gollum, and Jay Leno to the Vaccine Web-O-Conspiracy.

    And Wacko, don’t let them get you down. Some people really appreciate the work it takes to become a village idiot; it’s not easy being so loud and so wrong for so long.

  66. #66 Orac
    February 15, 2010

    Anyone else get the feeling that “Orac’s Wackosphere” is none other than “Dear Leader” J. B. Handley?

    It’s not, but it is a sockpuppet for someone who commonly infects vaccine-related threads here, namely Joe Blow, Suzie Q., Parental Choice, and a number of other sockpuppets.

    Yes, if you use sockpuppets, I reserve the right to call you out and identify your sockpuppets. Indeed, I’ve been contemplating a policy of banning anyone who gets caught using sockpuppets more than once or twice.

  67. #67 sausage
    February 15, 2010

    yes it all makes perfect sense .
    the young human Brian deer discovered and illumintii plot for the Masonic founded Welcome empire to take over the world until judgement day.

    and laid it out in the sacred chart on his website.
    The evil lords abducted him under the cover of “working in america” and rather like the Stepford wives he was replaced with a slightly shorter but otherwise identical copy of the original.

  68. #68 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    @Adam Y

    “He was pointing out how idiotic it was to say that vaccines overwhelm the immune system”.

    LOL! And he made that point by saying that hypothetically babies could safely receive 10,000 vaccines? Who’s the idiot? Dumbass.

  69. #69 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    @Autism Mom

    “You do realise that Wakefield is a gut specialist and not an autism expert right”?

    You really aren’t following along now are you? Wakefield is a gut specialist who was/is specifically working with children with autism who happen to also have GI problems? What is so hard to understand here? Why don’t you talk to me about all the experience that (Pr)Offit has treating/working with children with autism?

  70. #70 Science Mom
    February 15, 2010

    You really aren’t following along now are you? Wakefield is a gut specialist who was/is specifically working with children with autism who happen to also have GI problems? What is so hard to understand here? Why don’t you talk to me about all the experience that (Pr)Offit has treating/working with children with autism?

    Aw, ‘Autism Mom’, how sweet. Using a disorder as a pejorative that you are trying to defend is gutless and vile. What formal training in autism has Wakefield ever received? He was an academic gastroenterologist, with not even any training in paediatrics; his so-called expertise is purely self-proclaimed. Dr. Offit does not claim to be an autism expert; that doesn’t disqualify him to write about the charlatans involved with dubious autism treatments and aetiology claims.

  71. #71 Denice Walter
    February 15, 2010

    @ Ophelia: A kindly being will ask you if you are interested in the benefit of other beings**; if you agree,(after appropriate investigation) you will be initiated,via an arcane night-time ceremony**,into a secret order of the Illuminati(a/k/a Masons,the “Powers-that-Be”, BigPharma, Bilderburg Group):this the face They present to the world- the human face.You will recognize your Brothers and Sisters through the special rings they wear(color designates pay-grade).**(A few of our number have tried to alert the general public about our activities-they usually disappear quickly.Unfortunately, a few veiled reference remain because “War and Peace” and “The Magic Flute” got too popular to be withdrawn).

  72. #72 Zaher Bey
    February 15, 2010

    @Adam Y

    “He was pointing out how idiotic it was to say that vaccines overwhelm the immune system”.

    LOL! And he made that point by saying that hypothetically babies could safely receive 10,000 vaccines? Who’s the idiot? Dumbass.

    I thought you said that he said it was 100,000 vaccines? Oh, well, only off by a factor of 10.
    Your use of non sequitur as an argument style is also quite convincing.

  73. #73 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    @Science Mom

    “Aw, ‘Autism Mom’, how sweet. Using a disorder as a pejorative that you are trying to defend is gutless and vile”.

    Wow. I see that someone can’t read her way out of a paper bag. Are you referring to me as ‘Autism Mom’? Also, how did I use a disorder as a pejorative that I am trying to defend….? You are having a really difficult time keeping up here. I suggest you go take a deep breathe and come back when you are ready to make sense. In the meantime… buh-bye….

  74. #74 Kristen
    February 15, 2010

    Why don’t you address the fact that these so-called ‘unnecessary invasive medical procedures’ are now standard course of action taken with children who have some of the same GI problems that those children had?

    Are you aware that he was doing lumbar punctures on these children? How is that standard procedure for diagnosing GI disorders? Why don’t you look into what that psudo-doctor did to these children? It would be very illuminating.

    My son’s comfort is more important to me than this witchhunt for the “cause”. These parent’s had no right to subject their children to these procedures.

  75. #75 Science Mom
    February 15, 2010

    Bye Whacko, Your reading comprehension rivals the precision of your claims. Which is, of course, not much. If you have been reduced to calling me ‘Autism Mom’, as you did in post #69, and have failed to provide any supporting evidence for your claims, perhaps it is wise to run off.

  76. #76 Joseph
    February 15, 2010

    However, he should STFU when it comes to recommending vaccines and talking about how vaccines are perfectly safe and everything would be (hypothetically of course) fine and dandy for babies to get 100,000 vaccines at once, and write books about a topic he knows zero about (ie autism).

    @Wackosphere: Nonsense. For one, everyone has a right to say whatever they want about anything. Evidently, Dr. Offit does know a thing or two about autism, if you’ve read his book. You’re not really complaining about his credentials, are you? Because then, what do you make of David Kirby or Dan Olmsted or Mark Blaxill or JB Handley or Jim Carrey?

    A statement someone makes is either true or false. This is entirely independent of their personality and personal history. In other words, ad-hominems are lame and lazy. If you have an issue with a statment by Dr. Offit, address the statement.

  77. #77 Chris
    February 15, 2010

    Orac:

    It’s not, but it is a sockpuppet for someone who commonly infects vaccine-related threads here, namely Joe Blow, Suzie Q., Parental Choice, and a number of other sockpuppets.

    I will welcome a policy of banning that particular annoying troll. From my experience they are immune to reason, and resort to insults instead of providing evidence (okay, tit for tat, I did enjoy seeing “Parental Choice” get called “Parasitic Choice”!).

    It is very pathetic that several of us have time and time again patiently (at first) answered the questions put forth by these guys, and then get frustrated. Then a few weeks later having its sockpuppet come back with the same annoying questions. S/he/it does not care to debate fairly, but only bait and annoy for their own amusement.

    Ban the morphing sock puppets. That should also include that clueless clown pushing colloidal silver who morphs into “Medicien Man”, “Dr. I.M. Smart” and “Dangerous Doctor.”

  78. #78 Glaxo PharmaBase 7
    February 15, 2010

    MESSAGE BEGINS

    Lackeys, Shills and Tools:

    Send the sock puppets to us . . . they’re delicious with chips.

    MESSAGE ENDS

    Lord Draconis Zeneca, VC, iH7L
    PharmaCOM Orbital HQ
    0010101101001

  79. #79 Antaeus Feldspar
    February 15, 2010

    “He was pointing out how idiotic it was to say that vaccines overwhelm the immune system”.

    LOL! And he made that point by saying that hypothetically babies could safely receive 10,000 vaccines? Who’s the idiot? Dumbass.

    I would have to deduce that the idiot is you, Wackosphere, because Offit did make his point. The fact that fanatics like you misquote what he actually said, saying “100,000″ where Offit said “10,000″, and “this is what Offit thinks we should be giving children” where Offit said “each infant [immune system] would have this theoretical capacity”, does not change the fact that he made his point to the members of his audience that didn’t come to it with rabid prejudice.

    It’s as if we built a steel bridge over a river, and for some reason, there was a large contingent of fanatic, willfully ignorant people who wanted people to believe that the bridge was dangerous. “DANGER DANGER DANGER!” they howled. “You’re putting the lives of your children in danger if you let them cross that bridge!!” they screamed. “Letting all your kids cross at once will overwhelm the capacity of the bridge!!” they howled.

    And the people who actually understood the facts about the bridge calmly pointed out “This bridge can bear 3,000,000 pounds of weight. Even if every human being was 300 pounds, which clearly is an exaggerated estimate because most humans actually weigh far less than that, that still means it would take 10,000 people on the bridge at once to reach the point of ‘overwhelming’ it.”

    And the fanatics, who were never interested in facts or truth, only fear and sound bites, immediately start telling the lie “He says we should put 10,000 people on the bridge at once!!” Obviously nothing of the kind was said — and obviously the person who pointed out how much weight it would actually take to overwhelm the capacity of the bridge did refute the fantasy that a handful of people would be enough to do it, even if the fanatics stayed in denial on the issue.

  80. #80 Michelle
    February 15, 2010

    @79

    Great analogy…I’ll have to remember this one.

  81. #81 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    @Science Mom

    “If you have been reduced to calling me ‘Autism Mom’, as you did in post #69″

    It appears as if I did inadvertently called you ‘Autism Mom’ in a previous post. I apologize for that it was a mistake…(yes, I can accept a bit of ribbing on for that one…) I was not trying to offend you in any way as it appears you consider that an insult of some sort… Hmmmmmm…

  82. #82 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    @Antaeus Feldspar

    “he fact that fanatics like you misquote what he actually said, saying “100,000″ where Offit said “10,000″.

    Actually, you are wrong. There are various quotes/emails from Dr. (Pr)Offit where he has upped the number to 100,000. But hey what’s the difference anyway… Either 10,000 or 100,000 would easily destroy a 200 lb man … never mind an infant. (Just pointing out that you are wrong on your assessment about what (Pr)Offit has said).

    There are a few dozen reasons why your analogy falls way short. Having said that… Let me just say that I don’t believe that (Pr)Offit is saying that we should/could give babies 10,000 vaccines. I know that he knows that babies would be dropping dead all over the place if given that many vaccinations. The fact remains though that he titled this ‘assessment’ – or whatever you would call this steaming pile of poop – like this:

    “Addressing Parents’ Concerns: Do Multiple Vaccines Overwhelm or Weaken the Infant’s Immune System?”

    He tried and is trying to get to the weak and sheeplike parents (and doctors) to believe the completely unbelievable idea that multiple vaccines do not hurt babies. By using hyperbole as he did … he attempted to minimize the risks of vaccines. Basically, he’s a lying a-hole.

    In your analogy, the reality of the bridge would be that it would only actually hold 10 people at once before plummeting to the earth so the ‘fanatics’ were right in warning people to stay off the bridge. :)

  83. #83 Chris
    February 15, 2010

    What the morphing sock puppet troll does not understand is that there is a difference between 100000 antigens and 100000 vaccines.

    Anyone who is really interested is free to read the source that Antaeus Feldspar provided.

  84. #84 Joseph
    February 15, 2010

    Either 10,000 or 100,000 would easily destroy a 200 lb man … never mind an infant.

    @Wackosphere: OK, let’s see your math. Demonstrate that the equivalent of 10,000 or 100,000 vaccines in terms of antigens would kill someone. (Let’s keep in mind Dr. Offit’s estimate has to do with antigens, not needles and so forth, and this should be obvious if you read the paper.)

    Further, explain where Dr. Offit’s calculation is either algebraically mistaken or based on false assumptions.

    In other words, put up or shut up.

  85. #85 Antaeus Feldspar
    February 15, 2010

    I know that he knows that babies would be dropping dead all over the place if given that many vaccinations.

    So now along with all your other fact-free claims you’re claiming to be a telepath? I don’t think I need to tell you what a desperately lame manuever that is. I’m sure you can read it in my mind.

  86. #86 Luna_the_cat
    February 15, 2010

    You know, for the vast majority of human history, “hygiene” was really not a major concern in people’s lives short of keeping the flea and louse load under some level of control. For significantly large portions of human history, come to that, humans and their livestock shared living space. It is undeniably true that during these portions of human history infant mortality also ran on the order of 20-40% — but of those babies which survived, guaranteed this was nevertheless in an environment ripe with micro-organisms; easily tens of thousands overall, and that’s not even mentioning the dirt, crud, and random shite that crawling babies ingest.* This in itself makes the argument that the tiny amount of substances in vaccines “overwhelms” an infant immune system out to be nonsense. Sorry sister — the infant immune system is able to survive far greater insults than the modern squeaky-clean (by comparison) environment offers, because given what it has traditionally been exposed to otherwise NONE of us would be here…none of our ancestors would ever have survived long enough to breed.

    Even given that only a few thousand of the common environmental microorganisms usually cause illness and a few hundred are real serious pathogens, I’m pretty sure that the couple dozen vaccines babies get (which involve either viral proteins incapable of any sort of replication, or weakened strains at a load far, far, far lower than any normal exposure!) are well within tolerance limits.

    Of course, by targetting the real serious pathogens which *do* often result in fatal disease and giving the infant immune system a chance to develop a recognition and response to these without coming under full attack, as well as by rather more advanced notions of hygiene, we’ve reduced infant mortality from 40% down to less than 1% — so I also see a problem with advocating (as many appallingly ignorant anti-vaccinationists seem to) going back to the “natural way of getting immunity.”

    “Too much too soon” is just an idiotic argument all around. It’s like history is not just invisible, but completely nonexistant to the people who say this.

    ——–
    *I defy anyone who has ever dealt with babies to deny that they investigate the world by putting anything that can fit into their mouths, and/or that a perfectly clean infant in a spotlessly clean room has the abillity to develop a slime coat in under half an hour. Now, think what that would have been like in the environment in which people lived 1,000+ years ago.

  87. #87 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    @Chris

    “What the morphing sock puppet troll does not understand is that there is a difference between 100000 antigens and 100000 vaccines”.

    Here we go again. Listen Chris (and the rest of you antigen vs. vaccine crazies) … I get it, ok… Yup antigens. Great. Now, why don’t you explain to me why Dr. (Pr)Offit entitled the paper:

    “Addressing Parents’ Concerns: Do Multiple Vaccines Overwhelm or Weaken the Infant’s Immune System”?

    Dr. (Pr)Offit either made a mistake in entitling his paper like that OR he intentionally is trying to confuse the masses of ignorant sheep who may actually believe his nonsense. This paper is meant for doctors to give out to their parents who may be concerned about VACCINES… He goes on to bring the idea of 10,000 vaccines into the discussion… What a rat.

  88. #88 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    @ Antaeus Feldspar

    “So now along with all your other fact-free claims you’re claiming to be a telepath? I don’t think I need to tell you what a desperately lame manuever that is. I’m sure you can read it in my mind”.

    I nominate you to be the first one to be injected with 10,000 (hey make it 100,000) vaccines at once. Good luck!

  89. #89 Chris
    February 15, 2010

    Ignore the troll.

  90. #90 Joseph
    February 15, 2010

    Now, why don’t you explain to me why Dr. (Pr)Offit entitled the paper:

    “Addressing Parents’ Concerns: Do Multiple Vaccines Overwhelm or Weaken the Infant’s Immune System”?

    @Wackosphere: What’s wrong with the title? It seems perfectly fine. The abstract doesn’t have anything that could be misinterpreted either.

    The specific claim in question can only be found after a long technical discussion, starting with this:

    Current data suggest that the theoretical capacity determined by diversity of antibody variable gene regions would allow for as many as 109 to 1011 different antibody specificities.”

    So you need to read the paper to actually get to the claim. And if you’ve read the paper, you know exactly what he’s talking about and how the figure is estimated. The out-of-context version of the claim, promoted by the likes of AoA and you, is the only thing that could be misleading. That is hardly anything that Dr. Offit could be blamed for.

  91. #91 Jennifer B. Phillips
    February 15, 2010

    Wackaloon–your reading comprehension is deplorable. The paper is indeed meant to address parent concerns about VACCINES, specifically the ‘too many, too soon’ concern which has been in vogue for the past several years. Hence, it is aptly titled. Perhaps it has escaped your keen attention that VACCINES contain ANTIGENS, and thus a discussion of vaccine safety including statistics on the number of antigens that can be handled by an infant’s immune system is completely legitimate. If you’d actually read the paper, of course, you’d realize that, but you exemplify the very model of the anti-vax zealot–refusing to change your mind regardless of the overwhelming evidence against your position.

    Don’t like what this paper clearly states re: the 10(0),000 antigens? No problem–just lie about it! And, for best results, be sure to tell this lie to as many people as possible who don’t have the time, interest or resources to look up the original source and see that you are, in fact, talking straight out of your ass.

  92. #92 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    Ok wackadoo’s … Dr. (Pr)Offit should have had a disclaimer on his paper discussing how the number of antigens in vaccines has absolutely nothing to do with the number of vaccines that children can safely be given as infants. Remember, this paper was to address parents fears about multiple vaccines being given… The type of parents who he is trying to reach would likely be those who do not study the issues involved… They don’t have any idea that (Pr)Offit’s paper really has nothing to do with giving multiple vaccines at all…

  93. #93 Joseph
    February 15, 2010

    I’m starting to think not only Ginger went off the deep end.

  94. #94 Prometheus
    February 15, 2010

    O-Wacko whines:

    “Dr. (Pr)Offit should have had a disclaimer on his paper discussing how the number of antigens in vaccines has absolutely nothing to do with the number of vaccines that children can safely be given as infants.”

    Perhaps Dr. Offit should have had a disclaimer saying:

    “If you are incapable of understanding that nobody is saying that children – or adults – could tolerate 10,000 simultaneous vaccinations and that the following is referring to the antigens in vaccines, you shouldn’t be reading anything more complex than The Cat in the Hat. In that case, put this article down and go to the children’s section for more appropriate reading material.”.

    I think that most parents understood that 10,000 (or 100,000) injections would be fatal simply because of the volume of liquid injected (~5 liters – ~50 liters for 100,000) and realised that Dr. Offit was referring to the active ingredients of the vaccines (i.e. the antigens).

    Now, if O-Wacko wants to insist that he/she is significantly below median intelligence, I would be willing to stipulate that he/she would have the sort of “misunderstanding” he/she claims to be having.

    On the other hand, if O-Wacko is even close to normal intelligence, such a “misunderstanding” would have to be deliberate.

    Your choice – which is it?

    Prometheus

  95. #95 Orac's Wackosphere
    February 15, 2010

    @Prometheus

    “If you are incapable of understanding that nobody is saying that children – or adults – could tolerate 10,000 simultaneous vaccinations and that the following is referring to the antigens in vaccines, you shouldn’t be reading anything more complex than The Cat in the Hat. In that case, put this article down and go to the children’s section for more appropriate reading material.”

    I’m just thrilled that we all agree that (Pr)Offit is a dumbass for writing a paper insinuating a connection between antigens and multiple vaccines given to babies. We can now agree that he’s an idiot and the paper has absolutely zero relevance to the idea of ‘do multiple vaccines overwhelm the immune system’ (which of course was the premise of the paper). What a waste. I do appreciate the fact that we all agree on this though… :) Yay!

  96. #96 Chris
    February 15, 2010

    Prometheus:

    Now, if O-Wacko wants to insist that he/she is significantly below median intelligence,

    Yeah, it is that one. Ignore the troll.

  97. #97 Dedj
    February 15, 2010

    That was certianly not what was ‘agreed’ upon.

    You either even dumber than people give you credit for or you are a timewasting wanker working under the mistaken impression that they are funny.

    Either way, you look like an idiot and a repulsive person.

    Good going you. You managed to get some strangers to dislike you on the internet. You must be the first person to ever do that and you are totally novel and have a wonderful life and do not have tiny genitalia.

    Not at all.

  98. #98 Kristen
    February 15, 2010

    @Dedj

    I vote “timewasting wanker”

  99. #99 Dan
    February 16, 2010

    “If you are incapable of understanding that nobody is saying that children – or adults – could tolerate 10,000 simultaneous vaccinations and that the following is referring to the antigens in vaccines, you shouldn’t be reading anything more complex than The Cat in the Hat. In that case, put this article down and go to the children’s section for more appropriate reading material.”.

    What was that? Did Dr. Offit just suggest we drop a pallet of 10,000 copies of The Cat In The Hat on a newborn? What a monster! Adjuvants! Illegal immigrants! Gay abortion!!1one

  100. #100 ursa major
    February 16, 2010

    Wacko can type (or knows someone who takes dictation) but is just a waste of time. *ursa kills the sock-puppet, bows toward Minnesota and praises Cthulu* .

  101. #101 LW
    February 16, 2010

    @Luna_the_cat

    Thank you for explaining the history of hygiene to O-Wacko. I was mentally composing a similar history as I read O-Wacko’s offensive nonsense, but you did a better job than I could. Not that O-Wacko has any intention of actually reading your comment, or the intellectual ability to understand if it did.

  102. #102 historygeek
    February 17, 2010

    @ luna the cat

    i would say not a 1,000+ years but a 100+ years ago :) i loved watching the show “1900 House” the frist eisiode was a long litteny on why they couldn’t make it acurate as it had a high probablity of killing people. oh ya the child death rate from all causes was 1 in 4.

    but i agree with ur statement that given the woo miesters requirments for health. people would have ceased to exisit way before cizilations even got started. we wouldn’t have made it past hunter gather.

    i would like to thank all of u for my comfy long lived life style. i know the hard work that went into and what life was like without it. not pretty

  103. #103 drtwocents
    February 18, 2010

    Dangerous Bacon
    “take a look at the chart brian produced in 1992
    pretty wild conspiracy theory
    http://briandeer.com/septrin/wellcome-trust.jpg
    I think you should question which side he really is on… at the moment,,, looks like he could flip flop

    Posted by: sausage | February 14, 2010 4:56 PM

    Sorry if someone has already addressed this quote by Mr Sausage. I think it illustrates the mentality of many in the anti vax movement quite well. Mr. Sausage seems to think that this its a playground where we choose up sides and decide what is correct prior to doing the investigation. Your point that Mr. Deer has written both pro and con about specific pharmaceuticals, drugs, and unethical scum bags goes to show his ethics in reporting the facts and not something he decides based on ‘what side he is on’. I am sure you are accustomed to that mentality with many journalists. Mr Sausage, its called ‘science-based medicine’ and ‘truth in reporting’. I particularly notice that Mr. Deer does not write for the Huffington Post.

  104. #104 Pareidolius
    February 20, 2010

    MESSAGE BEGINS

    Ophelia Unit, apologies for the foul up. Cindy had insisted on using Federal Express for delivery of your Creche-1 Induction Pack (c-1/INDPAK). As I mentioned, I was in the shedding vats and unavailable during this time. When the rept . . . uh, cat’s away, the mice will play. Anyway we have not forgotten you. Obsidian 4 is finally out of the shop (bad repulsor . . . again!) and delivery will be forthwith.

    We picked up Orac’s Wackosphere the other day and I must say he was delicious. Some baby potatoes and a nice Riesling offset the bitterness nicely. His replicant is out of the vats and will continue to “harass” you, but be assured it is working for PharmaCOM now. Infiltration of the rebel nest is nearly complete.

    MESSAGE ENDS

    Lord Draconis Zeneca, VC, iH7L
    PharmaCOM Orbital HQ
    0010101101001

  105. #105 Time Travelin Gigolo
    March 2, 2010

    Orac,

    I went 9 years into the future and saw that Wakefield’s study had been replicated and his findings were true but in the end it said that more studies will have to be done. Oh by the way, when do you plan on running for office? I did see that your future in politics was much alive in 2019.

  106. #106 The Invaluable Disk
    April 19, 2010

    The reason people discredit Icke is because they don’t study. If they dig deeper, the veil will fall. He has connected it all and barely goes into their teachings. His mistake was the alien aspect, even though it MIGHT JUST BE TRUE!

  107. #107 Todd W.
    April 19, 2010

    @InvaluableDisk

    His mistake was the alien aspect, even though it MIGHT JUST BE TRUE…but most probably is a load of horse pucky!

    There, fixed that for ya.

The site is undergoing maintenance presently. Commenting has been disabled. Please check back later!