I tell ya. I take a weekend off from this blog, and what do I find on Sunday night when I sit back down to take a look and see if there’s anything I want to blog about?

Damn if those anti-vaccine loons aren’t pulling a fast one while I’m not looking. It turns out that über-quack Joe Mercola is teaming up once again with Barbara Loe Fisher’s the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) in a desperate attempt for the NVIC to try to demonstrate that it’s still relevant in the anti-vaccine movement after having been supplanted by Generation rescue. This time around, they’re doing SafeMinds one better and, hot on the heels of hosting “Vaccine Awareness Week” to spread misinformation far and wide, is now trying for greater notoriety. Via Skepchick Elyse Anders, I learn that Mercola and the NVIC are running anti-vaccine ads on the CBS Times Square JumboTron on 42nd Street:

A 15-second public service message featuring the National Vaccine Information Center is being shown on the CBS JumboTron on Times Square through April 28. Made possible by support from Mercola.com, the message is shown every hour for 18 hours a day on the 20 by 26-foot full color big screen located on 42nd St. between 7th and 8th Avenues near Broadway and the NY Port Authority and directly beneath where the crystal ball drops at midnight on Times Square every NewYear’s Eve.

The 15 second spot includes the logos of NVIC and Mercola.com and a photo of a Mom with her baby. It begins with the message Vaccines: Know the Risks and ends with the message Vaccination: Your Health. Your Family. Your Choice with the statue of liberty in the background.

Every day, more than 1.5 million people and 60,000 cars pass through Times Square, which is know as the “Gateway to New York” and “where the world meets America.”

Here is the ad:

This ad will continue to run for another 17 days after today once an hour every hour. Notice how the ad itself is cleverly couched in one of the favorite anti-vaccine tropes of “get informed about vaccines,” and then it points people to Mercola’s website and the NVIC website, both of which are wretched hives of scum and antivaccine quackery.

Obviously, given how Generation Rescue and its celebrity bubble brain spokesmodel Jenny McCarthy have become the most visible anti-vaccine propaganda organization, one can’t help but wonder whether the NVIC felt an intense need to try to recapture attention from GR and become viewed as relevant again, even at high cost. After all, it can’t be cheap to run an ad on a JumboTron at one of the most trafficked locations in the world, which makes me wonder where the NVIC came up with the bucks to do it.

Be that as it may, I join Skepchick and the Skeptical Teacher in urging you to sign the Change.org petition, an excerpt of which reads:

We are asking CBS not to run Mercola and the NVIC’s anti-vaccine ad in Times Square.

Mercola and the NVIC have cooperated to run an ad in Times Square on April 26. This ad directs viewers to their sites to learn more about vaccines. Upon visiting these two sites, consumers are falsely informed that vaccines cause autism, learning disabilities, seizures, cancer and death. Mercola actively encourages the public to refuse vaccines. And the NVIC works to ensure that parents have opportunity and reason to refuse vaccines for their children.

Their information is wrong. And the fear these two organizations are spreading is deadly. In the last four years, in the US alone, almost 77,000 people have been infected with vaccine preventable diseases. over 700 of those people died. According to the WHO, measles kills 200,000 people worldwide annually.

If you don’t believe that Mercola and the NVIC are anti-vaccine to the core, simply check out these searches:

Go on to Tweet @CBSOutdoor and use #VaxCBS to tell CBS that these ads are unacceptable. E-mail them as well. Maybe while we’re at it, we can get CBS to finally fire its anti-vaccine correspondent Sharyl Attkisson.

Comments

  1. #1 Chris
    April 15, 2011

    JayK:

    It appears that Gayl Hamilton’s “citation” post was held up in moderation, because it is basically a very long copy paste.

    … Using “data” from a “cover your ass” lawyer written package insert, which is not a scientific cite. It also does not answer the question of how much more dangerous the DTaP vaccine is versus pertussis because it does not show the relative risk.

    Dr. Hamilton, in the future when we ask for cites please restrict those to the full papers (not letters or opinion pieces) indexed in PubMed.

    (And why, for the love of mud, is anyone still trying to reason with that funhouse ride of bizarre insanity who seems to think “dead” viruses can replicate?)

  2. #2 T. Bruce McNeely
    April 15, 2011

    Hi Gayl (again)!

    Remember this?

    READ THE ORIGINAL JOURNAL ARTICLES! GO CHECK OUT THE COCHRANE COLLABORATION (the “gold standard” for evidence based medicine).
    Everything you will read there readily illustrates the manipulation of statistics, which is so easy to do, to support pharmaceutical companies.

    I realize that you’re probably pretty busy promoting disease in children, but if you could get me those cites, well, that would be great. Mmmmmkay?

  3. #3 Th1Th2
    April 15, 2011

    He still hasn’t answered why, if the human body is so susceptible to infection, we aren’t all dead from minor cuts and scrapes.

    …and injections?

  4. #4 Gray Falcon
    April 15, 2011

    Th1Th2, on what planet is that considered a proper answers? The human body takes far more cuts and scrapes than injections. Of course, I don’t expect you to figure something like that out on your own.

  5. #5 ArtK
    April 15, 2011

    @Gray Falcon

    It’s an appropriate response when you are so scared you soil yourself at the thought of a needle.

    More seriously, it’s a common human failing to discount the risks of what we find familiar, and to emphasize the risks of the unusual. That’s what makes us able to get behind the wheel and drive every day, but cringe in fear that a terrorist might hijack our airplane.

  6. #6 Bronze Dog
    April 15, 2011

    It’s funny to see where this thread and Thingy have gone. Now I’m imagining the shambling corpses of cartoon viruses being held back by Osmosis Jones.

  7. #7 Prometheus
    April 15, 2011

    I can’t believe Th1Th2 is at it again. It’s like watching a train wreck – you want to look away, but you can’t:

    “No. Any pathogen, replicating or not, when introduced in the body is infection.”

    Now, there is a slight possibility that Th1Th2 is confused about the difference between “not replicating” and “dead”. After all, one of the “hot” topics in medical microbiology is bacterial “persistence”, where they are alive but don’t replicate (and have minimal metabolic demands) for a prolonged period of time. If this is what Th1Th2 is talking about, a more accurate way of putting it would be:

    Any pathogen capable of replicating, when introduced into the body, is capable of causing an infection.

    After all, an “infection” requires at least a minimal amount of replication, otherwise it’s not an infection. Pathogens (or non-pathogens) introduced into the body would be an inocculation; an infection is what occurs when the inocculum replicates.

    But Th1Th2, never content to merely suggest incompetence, continues:

    “Also, there are infections that do not require replication.”

    For example….?

    The only example I can come up with is rather contrived: an infusion of massive numbers of bacteria, fungi, archaea or other foreign organism (even viruses) could cause a massive immune response, possibly a fatal immune response, even if they were somehow altered to be viable (i.e. not dead) but unable to replicate. Heck, even an infusion of massive amounts of dead bacteria (etc.) could trigger a fatal immune response.

    Apart from that example, I can’t think of an infection (and the example isn’t really an infection, per se) that doesn’t involve replication.

    I suppose it’s also possible that Th1Th2 is playing a sort of “word game” and means that the bacteria, fungi, viruses, etc. aren’t replicating at the time of the injection. After all, even with live virus vaccines, the virus isn’t replicating in the syringe – it needs live human cells to do that.

    However, it’s more than a bit of a stretch to say that the surface proteins in the hepatitis B vaccine or the toxoids in the tetanus or diphtheria vaccines can “infect” because they aren’t even the whole organism.

    Unfortunately, the most likely explanation is that Th1Th2 hasn’t a clue about what “infection” or “replication” actually mean. To paraphrase Th1Th2 (and this is the second time I’ve used this in two days):

    “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

    Prometheus

  8. #8 herr doktor bimler
    April 16, 2011

    No. Any pathogen, replicating or not, when introduced in the body is infection.

    If this usage catches on, newspaper reports will talk of bullet infections instead of gunshot wounds, and knife infections instead of a fatal stabbing.

  9. #9 W. Kevin Vicklund
    April 16, 2011

    A non-replicating infection is a type of latent infection. It is an infection in which replication has halted, but retains the ability to resume replication at a later date. A dead pathogen does not retain the ability to resume replication, so it can’t establish a non-replicating infection.

    NB: herpesvirus (Th1Th2’s example) initially replicates in the ganglion, but something causes the viral DNA to become circular (kind of like a plasmid). The virus doesn’t replicate in this form, but snip it at the right spot, and replication starts right back up. Or as ERV would say:

    OMG VIRUS SEXY TIMEZ!!! AI MAKEZ BABBY VIRUS NAUW!!!

  10. #10 CG
    April 16, 2011

    A dead pathogen does not retain the ability to resume replication, so it can’t establish a non-replicating infection.

    Not to mention the fact that even while latent, a herpesvirus is still expressing genes. It’s very far from dead.

  11. #11 Th1Th2
    April 16, 2011

    Prometheus,

    If this is what Th1Th2 is talking about, a more accurate way of putting it would be: Any pathogen capable of replicating, when introduced into the body, is capable of causing infection.

    Like I said it’s all about the sequence. Infection comes before replication. Infection occurs when a naive child opens his mouth or exposes his arm to acquire the pathogenic agent. Whether the pathogen replicates or not (live or killed), does not matter for there are vaccines that promote host-to-host transmission of infectious pathogens and there are that cause noncommunicable infection. Hence, infection-induced immunity is the primary goal behind vaccination, not infection control let alone prevention. So a little nitpicking would make your statement true.

    Any pathogen capable of replicating, when introduced into the body, is capable of causing infection

  12. #12 Th1Th2
    April 16, 2011

    Prometheus,

    If this is what Th1Th2 is talking about, a more accurate way of putting it would be: Any pathogen capable of replicating, when introduced into the body, is capable of causing infection.

    Like I said it’s all about the sequence. Infection comes before replication. Infection occurs when a naive child opens his mouth or exposes his arm to acquire the pathogenic agent. Whether the pathogen replicates or not (live or killed), does not matter for there are vaccines that promote host-to-host transmission of infectious pathogens and there are that cause noncommunicable infection. Hence, infection-induced immunity is the primary goal behind vaccination, not infection control let alone prevention. So a little nitpicking would make your statement true.

    Any pathogen capable of replicating, when introduced into the body, is capable of causing transmissible infection

  13. #13 Gray Falcon
    April 16, 2011

    Tell me, Th1Th2, do you have any support for your claims beyond “Take my word for it?”

  14. #14 Th1Th2
    April 16, 2011

    Prometheus,

    After all, an “infection” requires at least a minimal amount of replication, otherwise it’s not an infection. Pathogens (or non-pathogens) introduced into the body would be an inocculation; an infection is what occurs when the inocculum replicates.

    Infection occurs when the pathogen is present in the host’s tissue either by direct inoculation or exposure to natural infection.

    But Th1Th2, never content to merely suggest incompetence,

    Talk about incompetence. Vaccines often fail to induce immunity because of their incompetence to sustain prolonged antigenic stimulation.

    “Also, there are infections that do not require replication.”
    For example….?

    Vaccine-induced infections particularly caused by the use of killed, fragmented or recombinant DNA-based microorganisms.

    However, it’s more than a bit of a stretch to say that the surface proteins in the hepatitis B vaccine or the toxoids in the tetanus or diphtheria vaccines can “infect” because they aren’t even the whole organism.

    So if they cannot “infect”, how did they get through the innate barrier like the skin and end up deep in the host’s tissues and “they aren’t even the whole organism”?

    “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

    It’s science-based and the only way to challenge vaccine aplogists is through science.

  15. #16 CG
    April 16, 2011

    Infection occurs when the pathogen is present in the host’s tissue either by direct inoculation or exposure to natural infection.

    For the last time, you are wrong. You don’t get to redefine words to suit your purposes.

    An infection is the colonization of a host by a parasitic organism. Colonization requires a living organism living in another, which means this requires replication or at least the possibility or replication.

    Dead things cannot do this so they cannot infect anything, ever. You don’t get to redefine words to suit your purposes.

    Proteins and other non-living things can in a few instances cause disease. Many bacteria toxins and even a few viral proteins can do this in the absence of their organism. This is not an infection. There is no colonization of the host.

    The only non-living thing that can cause an infection is a prion, and it more or less replicates by causing the host protein to misfold.

  16. #17 Th1Th2
    April 16, 2011

    herr doktor bimler,

    If this usage catches on, newspaper reports will talk of bullet infections instead of gunshot wounds, and knife infections instead of a fatal stabbing.

    Even news editors know what pathogens are. So no, they will not use terms like bullet and knife infections. I thought vaccine apologists are a lot smarter than 5th graders.

  17. #18 Gray Falcon
    April 16, 2011

    Th1Th2:

    It’s science-based and the only way to challenge vaccine aplogists is through science.

    Where are you getting your science? You can’t just make science up, you need to work from physical evidence. So what’s your evidence?

  18. #19 W. Kevin Vicklund
    April 16, 2011

    Poor Thingy. She thinks cars are instantaneous teleportation devices, necrophiliacs can impregnate dead women, and dead pathogens are infectious.

  19. #20 Chris
    April 16, 2011

    Well, she does live in this fantastical funhouse that exists only in her strange convoluted brain.

  20. #21 Th1Th2
    April 16, 2011

    Vicklund,

    Poor Thingy. She thinks cars are instantaneous teleportation devices, necrophiliacs can impregnate dead women, and dead pathogens are infectious.

    Like I said before, it’s better to let go of this quietly than be exposed as germ-denialists. There are other ways though for them to evade scientific reasoning and utter humiliation, by means of ad hominem, faulty analogies and speculations. Check out #209, #386 and #415. If you cannot refute them with science, then that’s fine with me.

  21. #22 Gray Falcon
    April 16, 2011

    Once again, Th1Th2, it’s not up to us to prove you wrong, it’s up to you to show you’re right. You’re just making claims, where’s your evidence?

  22. #23 W. Kevin Vicklund
    April 16, 2011

    George W. Julian, discussing Lincoln’s views on the Emancipation Proclamation:

    In discussing the question, he used to liken the case to that of the boy who, when asked how many legs his calf would have if he called its tail a leg, replied, ” Five,” to which the prompt response was made that calling the tail a leg would not make it a leg.

    Calling diffusion an injection does not make it an injection. Calling an inoculation an infection does not make it an infection. We have repeatedly refuted #209, #386, and #415 using the correct scientific definitions. You are misusing these terms to poison the well.

  23. #24 Narad
    April 16, 2011

    Like I said before, it’s better to let go of this quietly than be exposed as germ-denialists.

    That’s a good one. To whom do you imagine one’s “germ denialism” would be “exposed” in the first place? By all appearances, this basically is your audience.

  24. #25 herr doktor bimler
    April 17, 2011

    Even news editors know what pathogens are. So no, they will not use terms like bullet and knife infections.

    Alas, that was back in the good old days before people decided that the consensus meanings of words could be ignored, and that they were free to come up with their own definitions that were more supportive of the case they were arguing.

  25. #26 Th1Th2
    April 19, 2011

    CG,

    An infection is the colonization of a host by a parasitic organism. Colonization requires a living organism living in another, which means this requires replication or at least the possibility or replication.

    That one up there is why you’re the one guilty of redefining words. You have recklessly misidentified colonization with infection. Colonization occurs when the pathogen is present at the skin/mucosal surface without tissue invasion. The mere presence or multiplication of a pathogen at the host’s skin/mucosal surface does not necessarily constitute infection. It has to be present at the host’s tissue for infection to occur.

    Dead things cannot do this so they cannot infect anything, ever. You don’t get to redefine words to suit your purposes.

    Hence, killed vaccines are intentionally injected into the host’s tissue to promote infection. They cannot colonize and infect an intact skin because they are dead thus they will be eliminated. Some vaccines though like the OPV purposely colonize and infect the human gut.

    Proteins and other non-living things can in a few instances cause disease. Many bacteria toxins and even a few viral proteins can do this in the absence of their organism. This is not an infection. There is no colonization of the host.

    If you only knew where colonization takes place then you wouldn’t be this totally confused.

  26. #27 Th1Th2
    April 19, 2011

    W. Kevin Vicklund,

    Calling diffusion an injection does not make it an injection. Calling an inoculation an infection does not make it an infection. We have repeatedly refuted #209, #386, and #415 using the correct scientific definitions. You are misusing these terms to poison the well.

    No. What I see is profound germ-denialism with persistent contradiction.

  27. #28 Krebiozen
    April 19, 2011

    I definitely see profound confusion and persistent contradiction here, but it’s in your comments Th1Th2. Maybe you should try taking a course in immunology – seriously.

    Immunology was the first subject that I really struggled with, as it’s so damnably complicated. It did engender a deep sense of humility and appreciation for those who figured all that stuff out.

    The words, ‘complement cascade’ still make me shudder…

  28. #29 MI Dawn
    April 19, 2011

    Time to killfile the Thing. He/She is becoming repetitive and boring to read. And still makes up definitions to words. I have more to my life than deal with the Thing.

    Thing, meet killfile. Killfile, meet Thing. Enjoy each other.

  29. #30 Sauceress
    April 19, 2011

    I’ve been away, but I have one last thing in this thread for Humpty Dumpty…
    #372

    They also contain non-specific chemicals produced by the body including the innate non-specific IgA that prevents the entry of pathogenic microorganisms.

    “innate non-specific IgA”
    ????
    I’d like a reference to this “innate non-specific IgA”
    You’re still confusing mucosal epithelia with MALT. IgA is the principle Ab of MALT.

    The innate immune response consists of:
    -Phagocytic cells:
    Leukocytes such as neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes.
    Tissue phagocytic cells such as macrophages.

    -Cells that release inflammatory mediators:
    Inflammatory cells in the tissue such as macrophages.
    Mast cells leukocytes such as basophils and eosinophils.

    -Natural killer cells.

    -Molecules such as complement proteins, acute phase proteins and cytokines.

    Antibodies are not part of the innate immune response as they are produced by B cells (B lymphocytes).
    Naive lymphocytes are activated by the innate immune response.
    Activated B cells and T cells are part of the adaptive immune response…by definition

    I gave you the above link for a reason!
    Read. The. Book.

    Principles of innate and adaptive immunity

    #414

    It’s science-based and the only way to challenge vaccine aplogists is through science.

    So why don’t you get back to us when you can actually produce some genuine science rather than this inane armchair “expert” bullshit you’ve been posting so far.

    Like everyone else, I’d love to know where you’re getting all this crap. Obviously the same place all crap comes from.

  30. #31 Gray Falcon
    April 19, 2011

    You know, Th1Th2 never did answer my request for evidence.

  31. #32 Narad
    April 19, 2011

    You know, Th1Th2 never did answer my request for evidence.

    It might be simpler to just capitulate and see if there’s anything else. I mean, OK, I’m guilty of “profound germ-denialism with persistent contradiction.” So? Do I get a pamphlet or something?

  32. #33 Sauceress
    April 19, 2011

    Th1Th2 never did answer my request for evidence.

    Evidence? Eveedense? Humpty Dumpty don’t need no damn eveee-dense!
    It don’t need none of them damned edukase-shuns either!

  33. #34 Chris
    April 19, 2011

    Krebiozen:

    I definitely see profound confusion and persistent contradiction here, but it’s in your comments Th1Th2. Maybe you should try taking a course in immunology – seriously.

    Actually a course in basic English might be more appropriate. She keeps using definitions of several words that only make sense to her, and no one else.

  34. #35 Th1Th2
    April 19, 2011

    Chris,

    Actually a course in basic English might be more appropriate. She keeps using definitions of several words that only make sense to her, and no one else.

    How about simply looking at the anatomy of the skin before you embarrass yourself again and again? Have you forgotten what you said?

    Because it is obvious you don’t even know how to look at a drawing and notice that there were no veins in them. Do you even know the difference between veins, arteries, capillaries and muscle?

    Now where is your own version of the skin which you claimed does not consist of blood vessels?

    How about a trivia for the confused and obtuse.

    Q.Each square inch of the human skin consists of how many feet of blood vessels?
    A. 20 feet.

  35. #36 Composer99
    April 19, 2011

    And Thing answers Chris’ question about whether Thing knows the difference between veins, arteries, capillaries and muscle with a resounding ‘no!’ (and with a dirty great strawman, but who’s keeping track of Thing1Thing2’s straw army?)

  36. #37 Th1Th2
    April 19, 2011

    Sauceress,

    Evidence? Eveedense? Humpty Dumpty don’t need no damn eveee-dense!
    It don’t need none of them damned edukase-shuns either!

    Evidence of ignorance and humiliation, you sure have plenty of it. Check out #303 and #372.

  37. #38 Gray Falcon
    April 19, 2011

    Th1Th2, I said evidence, not claims. Anyone can make claims. I can claim that you practice black magic. Without evidence, though, claims are meaningless.

  38. #39 Th1Th2
    April 19, 2011

    Chris,

    And Thing answers Chris’ question about whether Thing knows the difference between veins, arteries, capillaries and muscle with a resounding ‘no!’ (and with a dirty great strawman, but who’s keeping track of Thing1Thing2’s straw army?)

    You are just as confused. Check out #265. Do you also have your new version of the skin anatomy?

  39. #40 Th1Th2
    April 19, 2011

    Gray,

    Th1Th2, I said evidence, not claims. Anyone can make claims. I can claim that you practice black magic. Without evidence, though, claims are meaningless.

    .

    You boldly claimed this. Are you going to deny it again and again?

    You’re the one who stated that the live-virus version is still out there infecting people. My claim was that it did infect people, but it was not virulent enough to spread as badly as wild-type polio. I just want evidence for your claim.

    Now where is your evidence?

  40. #41 Gray Falcon
    April 19, 2011

    Th1Th2, you’re assuming that there are only two extremes, that vaccines always cause infection, or that they never cause infection. I said that the live-virus vaccine caused a minor infection, I never claimed a killed virus could infect people. You claimed that ALL vaccinations cause infections, please provide evidence for that.

    Also, do you have any evidence that veins and capillaries are identical?

  41. #42 Sauceress
    April 19, 2011

    @Humpty Dumpty #436

    Check out #303 and #372.

    First up..
    TH1TH2 #303 response to Sauceress #300

    Can you identify the first five words that you have quoted?

    Yes, and your point is?

    Good grief. What the hell are you talking about?

    Chris asked:

    Wow! It even has pictures! So, Th1Th2, look at the pretty pictures. Tell us which one shows the end of the needle going into a vein.

    TH1TH2 reponded:

    I couldn’t tell but you will need Band-Aid or a cotton ball for a needlestick injury like that right?

    Perhaps Humpty can explain what it was it meant to imply by its answer?

    Next #372
    Regarding your inability to comprehend the difference between mucosal epithelia and MALT, as well your ignorance as to the difference between innate and adaptive immune responses, I’ve posted a response to that as well.
    No doubt, due to my post containing a link which details the differences between the innate and adaptive immune response, that post is still in moderation. Here’s that post without the html link:

    Sauceress:
    [quote]
    I’ve been away, but I have one last thing in this thread for Humpty Dumpty…
    #372

    They also contain non-specific chemicals produced by the body including the innate non-specific IgA that prevents the entry of pathogenic microorganisms.

    innate non-specific IgA

    ????
    I’d like a reference to this “innate non-specific IgA”
    You’re still confusing mucosal epithelia with MALT. IgA is the principle Ab of MALT.

    The innate immune response consists of:
    -Phagocytic cells:
    Leukocytes such as neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes.
    Tissue phagocytic cells such as macrophages.

    -Cells that release inflammatory mediators:
    Inflammatory cells in the tissue such as macrophages.
    Mast cells leukocytes such as basophils and eosinophils.

    -Natural killer cells.

    -Molecules such as complement proteins, acute phase proteins and cytokines.

    Antibodies are not part of the innate immune response as they are produced by B cells (B lymphocytes).
    Naive lymphocytes are activated by the innate immune response.
    Activated B cells and T cells are part of the adaptive immune response…by definition

    I gave you the above link for a reason!
    Read. The. Book.

    Link to “Principles of innate and adaptive immunity” (Immunobiology, Janeway et. al.)[unquote]”

    That is all.

  42. #43 Sauceress
    April 19, 2011

    Evidence of ignorance and humiliation, you sure have plenty of it. Check out #303 and #372.

    My responses are in moderation.

    @#434

    Q.Each square inch of the human skin consists of how many feet of blood vessels?
    A. 20 feet.

    A Vein is a blood vessel, but a blood vessel is not necessarily a vein. Do you understand?

  43. #44 Th1Th2
    April 19, 2011

    Gray Falcon,

    I said that the live-virus vaccine caused a minor infection,[…]

    You know for sure that is a big slap on Chris’ face you made there. You’re actually disagreeing with her when she claimed the live measles virus vaccine has prevented and reduced the incidence of measles infection. So who’s among you is the real germ-denialist? Haha

    […]I never claimed a killed virus could infect people. You claimed that ALL vaccinations cause infections,[…]

    Yes. ALL vaccinations cause infection. Some cause transmissible infections (live vaccines) and others promote noncommunicable infections(killed, fragmented, recombinant DNA-based vaccines).

    […]please provide evidence for that.

    It’s simple. The body’s immune response against vaccines.

  44. #45 Th1Th2
    April 19, 2011

    Gray,

    Also, do you have any evidence that veins and capillaries are identical?

    Who said they are identical?

  45. #46 Gray Falcon
    April 20, 2011

    Th1Th2

    The body’s immune response against vaccines.

    Not good enough. My body provides a strong immune response against pollen, and that certainly isn’t an infection. Try again.

    Who said they are identical?

    You did, when you pointed the number of blood vessels per square inch in a body, and claimed that as proof that vaccines are administered intravenously.

  46. #47 Th1Th2
    April 20, 2011

    Gray,

    Not good enough. My body provides a strong immune response against pollen, and that certainly isn’t an infection. Try again.

    It’s not an infection; it’s called shameless ignorance. Anybody with a brainstem knows that infections are caused by pathogens and not allergens. I did call you a germ-denialist for a reason. Of course, you will never stop ridiculing yourself.

    You did, when you pointed the number of blood vessels per square inch in a body, and claimed that as proof that vaccines are administered intravenously.

    Check out #157. This what I said. “Parenteral vaccines are administered into areas which are highly vascularized i.e. abundant blood supply found in the deltoid.”

    Of course, vaccines can also be given intravenously. Check out #77 and #99. Do you have any problem with that?

  47. #48 Sauceress
    April 20, 2011

    What would one call a hybridisation of Humpty Dumpty and Monty Python’s Black Knight?

  48. #49 Krebiozen
    April 20, 2011

    I withdraw my suggestion that Th1Th2 should take immunology classes. I would not wish to be responsible in any way for a teacher’s nervous breakdown.

  49. #50 Gray Falcon
    April 20, 2011

    It’s not an infection; it’s called shameless ignorance. Anybody with a brainstem knows that infections are caused by pathogens and not allergens. I did call you a germ-denialist for a reason. Of course, you will never stop ridiculing yourself.

    Did you even read my post? Do you know what allergies are? Tell me, where are you getting your information from? So, why do I get sinus headaches and sniffles during pollen season, if not allergies?

  50. #51 Gray Falcon
    April 20, 2011

    Th1Th2, please provide evidence for your claims. Don’t just say things like “Anybody with a brainstem knows that”, I’ve heard similar arguments from white supremacists.

  51. #52 CG
    April 20, 2011

    That one up there is why you’re the one guilty of redefining words. You have recklessly misidentified colonization with infection.

    Actually, you are guilty of not understanding what I wrote, not to mention still redefining words.

    An infection of an organism is a kind of colonization by a parasite that is detrimental to the host.

    To quote a medical dictionary, an infection: the state produced by the establishment of an infective agent in or on a suitable host

    And the establishment of an infective agent is, by definition, a colonization. Not to mention killed things can’t establish anything, you know, being dead and all.

    Colonization occurs when the pathogen is present at the skin/mucosal surface without tissue invasion.

    Again, wrong.

    Tissue invasion is not a requirement for infection. E. coli O157:H7 doesn’t leave the intestine, yet it still causes an infection.

    I hate to play this cared, you are arguing with a microbiologist who studies an animal commensal and a human pathogen. The difference between colonization and infection is a very fine line.

    You are clearly very, very confused about basic microbiology and immunology.

  52. #53 T. Bruce McNeely
    April 20, 2011

    You are clearly very, very confused about basic microbiology and immunology.

    No, no, no!

    The problem is that that the rest of us don’t speak Thinglish.

  53. #54 informed consent advocate
    May 6, 2011

    HORRORS!!! OMG! OMG! OMG!!!! An ad (public service announcement) that lets people know they have a CHOICE whether to have themselves or their child injected with a possibly harmful, possibly ineffective substance! GET THE FACTS. KNOW YOUR RIGHTS! Exemptions (medical, religious, “personal belief”) to mandatory school-entry vaccination are available. (They vary, depending upon your state.)

  54. #55 NJ
    May 6, 2011

    icasshole@454:

    HORRORS!!! OMG! OMG! OMG!!!! An ad (public service announcement) that lets people know they have a CHOICE whether to have themselves or their child lies to people to imply that they would be injected with a possibly harmful, possibly ineffective substance!

    FIFY.

  55. #56 Chris
    May 6, 2011

    “informed consent advocate”, can you please tell us why a supplement seller (Mercola) and a public relations mavin (Barbara Loe Fisher) are a better source of medical information than the American Academy of Pediatrics? Please provide documentation of Ms. Fisher’s medical education credentials, and Mercola’s pediatric’s and vaccine research papers. Thank you.

  56. #57 augustine
    May 6, 2011

    Chris, not a clinician but a rocket scientist and childhood military traveler therefore knows everything about everything:

    can you please tell us why a supplement seller (Mercola) and a public relations mavin (Barbara Loe Fisher) are a better source of medical information than the American Academy of Pediatrics?

    http://www.mercola.com/forms/background.htm

    http://www.nvic.org/about.aspx

    Mercola’s pediatric’s and vaccine research papers?

    As soon as you give ORAC’s peer reviewed of the same.

    BTW the AAP is a trade organization. As a trade organization it’s first and foremost duty is to it’s professional members. It seeks to protect itself’s interests and the interest’s of it’s members.

    Vaccination is a major part of it’s financial business.

  57. #58 Moderation
    May 6, 2011

    Augustine: You are absolutely clueless and talking out of your a**. It is one thing to talk about Big Pharma making money off vaccines, but you betray your utter ignorance when you imply that pediatricians make a buch of money off vaccines. I am currently employed by a large medical company and am paid a salary. I recieve NO bonus or other benefit from administering vaccines to protect my patients. I have also worked at several small pediatric practices that either lost money or barely broke even managing the administration of vaccines. The paperwork is massive (tracking the lotsin the patient chart, in the vaccine log, monitoring the refidgerator and freezer temps and documenting, etc.). Do us all a favor and educate yourself a little before start typing a comment.

  58. #59 augustinea
    May 6, 2011

    Augustine: You are absolutely clueless and talking out of your a**. It is one thing to talk about Big Pharma making money off vaccines, but you betray your utter ignorance when you imply that pediatricians make a buch of money off vaccines.

    Uh, have you ever heard of a well baby visit? If it weren’t for vaccines then those visits wouldn’t exist. It doesn’t take a doctor to weigh a baby.

    And pediatricians in general don’t make a bunch of money (relatively speaking),and I didn’t imply that they did. But the vaccine visit comprises a major part of practice. But I would guess that the AAP has just a teenie bit more money than a pediatrician in private practice. And when you add up all of the pediatricians influenced by the AAP, that’s a lot of money that flows and changes hands.

  59. #60 Moderation
    May 6, 2011

    Augustine: Let me quote you: “Vaccination is a major part of it’s financial business.”

    Look I have read enough of your comments to know you are not stupid, so I am left to believe that you are lazy. Have you ever taken your child in for a check up. Vaccination is a tiny part of a “well child” visit. There is developmental screening (gross motor, fine motor and speach), there is monitoring of growth, discussing parenting techniques, dealing with parental concerns and performing a complete physical exam. In fact of the 10 “well child” visits in the first two years of life, vaccines are only administered at 5 or 6. Even if we eliminated all vaccine preventable disease these visits would still occur.

  60. #61 Militant Agnostic
    May 6, 2011

    Have you ever taken your child in for a check up?

    I suspect Augustine’s child is imaginary just like his evidence.

  61. #62 LW
    May 6, 2011

    “Look I have read enough of your comments to know you are not stupid”

    I’ve read enough of augustine’s comments to know that it is astonishingly stupid.

  62. #63 Th1Th2
    May 6, 2011

    CG,

    Tissue invasion is not a requirement for infection. E. coli O157:H7 doesn’t leave the intestine, yet it still causes an infection.

    You’re bluffing again. I was surprised you never mentioned any of the the common childhood diseases a.k.a. VPDs as good examples of nasty infections. Don’t you guys preach this all the time? I mean polio causing paralysis, measles -> encephalitis, pertussis -> pneumonia and so on and so forth. Instead you chose E. coli O157:H7 because “it doesn’t leave the intestine”? Oh really? Or maybe because something else is causing the kidneys to fail. eh? (Hint: HUS)

    I hate to play this cared, you are arguing with a microbiologist who studies an animal commensal and a human pathogen.

    You’re no different than any of those clueless pretenders.

    The difference between colonization and infection is a very fine line.

    Then tell me the difference instead of contradicting yourself when you claimed this…

    And the establishment of an infective agent is, by definition, a colonization.

  63. #64 Krebiozen
    May 7, 2011

    I shouldn’t feed the troll, but I can’t ignore this sort of ignorant arrogance.

    You’re no different than any of those clueless pretenders.

    Th1Th2 Do you really think you are so clever you have figured out that the past 150 years of microbiology is all wrong? That the thousands of scientists (including CG) who have spent their lives studying and researching this were all “clueless pretenders”, despite the huge amount of overwhelming evidence that confirms they are right? You might benefit from researching the work of some of these Nobel Prize winning scientists. It might give you some idea of the sheer volume of research that supports the ideas you ridicule.

    Every comment you post makes it even more obvious that you have misunderstood the most basic elements of immunology and microbiology.

  64. #65 Th1Th2
    May 7, 2011

    Krebiozen,

    Well, the burden of proof is yours to support CG’s false claim that “Tissue invasion is not a requirement for infection.” Again there are a dozen *sigh* VPDs to choose from but why pick on the E. coli O157:H7? For someone who is unable to distinguish colonization from infection is definitely a clueless pretender. Let’s start with that first.

  65. #66 Krebiozen
    May 7, 2011

    Th1Th2 – I’m not really interested in futile semantic arguments when you seem to think you can redefine words to mean whatever you want. If you can express what you are trying to explain in understandable English, using the dictionary definitions of the words you use, please do so. Otherwise, you are wasting everyone’s time.

  66. #67 MeMyself
    May 10, 2011

    So let me get this straight…they are promoting “get informed” and you are stating that they are quacks and anti-vaccine “loons”??? So are you one of the those “just follow your government, don’t ask questions” people as well? got to say, I am with the pro freedom, pro American, pro choice, pro HUMAN “loons”. God, it feels good to be a loon!!

  67. #68 Linda Dowling
    September 22, 2011

    I had polio enough said.

  68. #69 Phillip J. Baker
    November 28, 2011

    It looks like the Jumbotron is up for grabs to anyone with the cash to pay for it. The International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society (ILADS) is also running an ad of their own, claiming to inform the public about Lyme disease. Unfortunately, much of what they have to say is unreliable and/or misleading. Is there an adult in charge of supervising the content of the Jumbotron, or is it nothing more than a giant, electronic graffiti machine?

New comments have been temporarily disabled. Please check back soon.