15 antivaccine tropes for Christmas

the-anti-vaccine-epidemic

Christmas is over, and we’re in that weird time between Christmas and New Years Day, when, usually at least, I have to work but so many people are out and so few patients seem to want to come in that it hardly seems worth the effort. So it is with the blog, too. The week between Christmas and New Years tends to be the lowest traffic period of the year. Although that’s been true this year as well, I’ve noticed more commenting activity than I usually see. So, I figured, what the heck? There are odds and ends worth writing about, although I don’t plan on doing an epic posts before next Monday. Who knows? Maybe I’ll finally figure out how to do brevity right.

Try not to laugh too hard.

In any case, right before Christmas, a reader sent me a link to yet another brain dead listicle that’s longer than most listicles in which an antivaccine maven tries to warn a hypothetical “normal, socially accepted person” about to become an antivaccinationist like him what to look out for. (Why is it that antivaccinationists can’t seem to keep their listicles short and punchy, as any good link bait listicle should be? Even I can manage that when I put my mind to it.) It’s entitled 15 Things You Should Know Before Becoming An Anti-Vaxxer, and, hoo boy, is it a doozy, so much so that I doubt I’ll be able to cover all 15 items in the listicle.

At least Matt, who describes himself as a “conservative millennial whose greatest wish is that people would just stop and think” is honest and declares himself an “anti-vaxer.” Of course, the very fact that he is an antivaxer demonstrates that, whatever it is he’s been thinking about so much, he’s been going about it all wrong. No surprise there. He’s also useful in that, as a self-declared conservative, he’s a nice counterpoint to the mistaken prevailing idea that antivaccine pseudoscience is primarily the province of the left. As I’ve described many times before, it’s not.

His introduction is a combination of bravado and self-pity that we’ve seen before. In it he declares himself an outcast, but equally declares that he chose this path because, well, I’ll let him him say it in his own words:

For those of you still reading, you read that right. An Anti-Vaxxer.

You’ve seen things about me. The scum of the earth? Disease ridden outcast? The sickie in town?

You’ve read things about me. The idiot. The moron. The child abuser. The ignorant one.

You’ve said things about me. The pseudo science pusher? The health nut? The conspiracy theorist?

Yeah… it sucks. But that’s me. And the worst part is, I did it to myself.
I chose to be an Anti-Vaxxer, even though I knew forsaking my pro-medicine stance wouldn’t be easy.

I chose to keep researching when I had my curiosity peaked. I chose to keep clicking those links.

I chose to delve into forbidden mainstream knowledge; to suckle at the temptingly attractive teat of common sense. I chose to walk this path.
I guess some people have to learn the hard way. I did.

See? He’s a special snowflake, not like all those pro-vaccine sheeple. He kept researching. He kept clicking those antivaccine links on the Internet. Unlike you, he was brave enough to “delve into forbidden knowledge.” At this point, I wanted to ask Matt whether he had given himself a rotator cuff tear patting himself on the back so furiously, but I couldn’t because of the bile rising in my throat due to a profound urge to vomit in reaction to his self-important arrogance of ignorance. However, I have seen worse; so my constitution is strong enough to resist such urges.

Let’s “cherry pick” my favorites among the 15 items. Feel free to take on the leftovers that I don’t bother with or to take a bite out of ones I have.

The first item Matt starts out with is this:

1. Once you go down this road, you won’t go back.

If you really put in the time and research, you’ll eventually see for yourself what the ‘crazies’ are really saying. You’ll also realize that it makes perfect sense. It’s logical. And you’ll see that what you’ve been thinking are anti-scientific ramblings all these years are really the most scientifically valid points in the entire debate.

You’ll see that there really is more risk than benefit, and that there really haven’t been any legitimate safety studies conducted on vaccines or their ingredients.

You’ll see plenty of other things along the way, and if you put enough time in, you’ll realize sooner or later that there’s no going back. It’s ok, though. There’s a growing number of sensible, down-to-earth people who are there to help you along the way. The road is dark, but there’s light at the end. I promise.

To me, this resembles a promise to a convert to a new religion. “Listen,” the priest or imam or whatever cleric we’re talking about will say, “It’s hard. It’ll take a lot of work. People will give you crap. But it’s worth it. There are lots of people doing the same thing.” Whether that’s the case with a religion is pretty subjective. Whether it’s the case “converting” to the religion of antivaccination is easy to assess: It’s not. What Matt is trying to persuade people is that becoming an antiscience loon who endangers his own children and others is a good thing to be.

In fact, consider item #2, which is that “you’ll be forced to ponder certain possibilities you didn’t consider before.” What Matt doesn’t tell you is that the reason you didn’t consider these possibilities before is because you were a rational, pro-science, pro-medicine person before. It’s only by contemplating and embracing (or at least accepting) pseudoscience that you can become an antivaccinationist like him. Oh, well…

Perhaps my favorite is this one:

3. Sometimes conspiracy theories are actually true.

You’ll instantly be branded a conspiracy theorist for questioning vaccines. No, I’m not kidding.

Numerous ‘extremist’ Pro-Vaxxers will descend on you like vultures on a carcass just for asking why the autism rate is skyrocketing, since you’ll discover that there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that autism is a body disease, not a mental disease, and it’s an auto-immune body response. You’ll see how many thousands of kids out there suddenly developed autism after a vaccine(often first noticed after a whooping cough shot). You’ll see that there’s a ton of correlation between vaccines and autism. Doesn’t matter, though. You’ll be a laughing stock. They’ll say that theory has been debunked, and then fail to show you any real studies to back this up. They call you names, and lump you in with other conspiracies that you may even think are ridiculous, just to publicly shame you. Get ready.

But a conspiracy theory is just that: A theory with some sort of compelling evidence that someone is covering up an act of crime and lying about it. Until it’s proven, it remains a theory. Let’s go on to prove vaccines are at the heart of one of the biggest, evidence based conspiracies out there.

Or, far more likely, you really have become a conspiracy monger. After all, contrary to what Matt claims, there is no correlation between vaccines and autism, at least not any that indicates causation. As I’ve described more times than I can remember over the last decade, all the well-designed epidemiological studies that have looked at the question have failed to find a correlation. Yes, autism prevalence has increased greatly over the last 20 years, but that does not mean that it’s the vaccines. Again, as I’ve pointed out before, cell phone use has increased greatly over the last 20 years. Why isn’t it cell phones? Wifi use has skyrocketed over that same period. Why isn’t it wifi? Internet usage in general has also skyrocketed? Why isn’t it the Internet that’s causing autism. But, no. It’s the vaccines. It’s always the vaccines. It’s always been the vaccines. To antivaccinationists, it will always be the vaccines. Always. You can see that by the way that Matt says, “let’s go on to prove vaccines are at the heart of one of the biggest, evidence based conspiracies out there.” Not “let’s see if vaccines are at the heart of one of the biggest, evidence based conspiracies out there” Rather, let’s prove it.

In other words, Matt “knows” vaccines are evil. He’s just cherry picking information to “prove it.”

Which leads to Matt’s warning that you’ll become a “hardened person”:

You’ll become immune to insults after a while. The ‘extremist’ Pro-Vaccine crowd shows up online in large numbers and hurls many stones. They may hurt at first, but if you keep at it, it just toughens your skin. After a while, you’ll probably become so calloused that you may not even care what your friends or family members think of you anymore. There is a time that you reach a point of nay-saying immunity, and it’s certainly not thanks to a vaccine.

As my irony meter melted down, I went on to read:

5. You’ll need to develop an acute sense of civility.

As a battle hardened veteran of the vaccine debate, you’ll be filled with an urge to warn others, yet take the high road in most debates. You’ll see that to win a vaccine argument, you need to be poised and controlled. While some sarcasm is allowed, you can’t overdo it. Once you’ve discovered that vaccines are nothing but a big gamble with your child’s life, you’ll want to make sure those you love have the same information.

And that’s when Matt blew another one of my irony meters. He melted that sucker flat, to the point that all that was left was was a bubbling, pathetic, sparking pile of goo. After all, over the last decade I’ve endured frequent abuse at the hand of antivaccinationists like Matt. Four years ago, antivaccinationists mounted a concerted effort to get me fired from my job. Since then, periodically they mount attacks against me. If Matt really thinks antivaccinationists are (or have to be) more “civil” than their opponents, I respectfully submit that he is on crack.

Reading the rest of Matt’s listicle, which is well over 6,000 words and thus actually beyond even what I, who am known for my logorrhea, usually generate, led me to conclude that I must stand in awe. While it’s true that I do indeed sometimes write 6,000 word posts, particularly for my not-so-super-secret other blog, but for the most part, I keep myself under 2,000-3,000 words here, which is plenty indeed. That’s why I’m not going to march through each and every item, although I must admit that #10 (“you’ll read the ingredients on a vaccine insert”) amused me given the frequently used and deceptive technique of “argument by package insert” so beloved of antivaccinationists. Add to that his liberal use of the “toxins gambit,” and the lulz just keep coming. (If you don’t believe me, read Matt’s hilariously scientifically ignorant “rebuttal” to Dr. Paul Offit.) Ditto Matt’s claim in #11 that vaccines cause sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). They don’t. In fact, if anything, they decrease the risk of SIDS. Then in #6, he proclaims antivaccinationists not “anti-science” while demonstrating quite conclusively in the text that he is, in fact, antiscience. It is, however, very cute to see Matt attempt to justify a “vaxed versus unvaxed” study without understanding clue one about why a randomized, placebo-controlled study of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children would be unethical and without a hint that he might understand the incredible difficulties that would be involved in carrying out such a study. It’s not so cute when he delves into the intellectually dishonest “vaccines didn’t save us” gambit in #7, when he describes vaccines as “one of the biggest hoaxes in human history.”

Perhaps what’s most telling is #12:

12. You’ll start to realize there’s a big problem with western medicine.

The more you research, the more you’ll start to see that modern medicine has some real issues. Ever notice how when you’re sick, you get a prescription for something usually pretty expensive (most insurance covers the majority of cost) that temporarily relieves your symptoms? Most doctors will recommend some kind of medication to mask your issue, not fix it.

The reason is simple: Most doctors don’t know how to fix your problem. Instead, they prescribe man-made medicine that will “help” only to a certain degree, instead of focusing on ridding the body of your ailment. Your time is much better spent with a holistic health provider. They will actually take the time to inform you of the best natural way to cleanse your body of various ailments; with amazing results. Many people roll their eyes when you mention holistic health. This is partly due to the work of Big Pharma, who has put in a ton of subtle work behind the scenes to make sure you think that way. There is potentially a lot of money flushed down their drains for every person that seeks natural healthcare.

Everything you see nowadays is designed to make you think that modern medicine is the best thing since sliced bread. They’ll also tell you that homeopathic medicine and natural healthcare are “dangerous”, and unproven. You’ll discover that this is not true at all. Most of the things your holistic health provider recommends fix the problem fast, with no side effects, are cheaper, and have been proven for hundreds or even thousands of years. There are many things you’ll learn to be able to actually keep yourself healthy and your immune system like an iron horse so you’re less likely to get sick in the first place.

Of course Big Pharma would have a problem with holistic health; it’s a direct threat to their business. As we’ve already discussed, once the pharmaceutical companies are upset, the medical system, government branches, and media are soon to follow. It’s a vicious cycle, so it will come as no surprise to you that many holistic health care providers are targets. The government seeks to shut them down whenever possible and strip them of their medical licenses. They are under intense scrutiny from a very powerful entity.

If you actually put in the time to seek holistic diagnoses, you’ll learn more in an hour about your body than you ever knew before, and you’ll quickly discover it’s far from the quackery you thought it was. It really works; I’ve personally experienced it.

No, the reason I roll my eyes when someone like Matt mentions “holistic health” is because I know that what he means by it is a hodge-podge of quackery. It is, however, amusing to see just how much antivaccine views correlate with quackery. Naturopaths and chiropractors, for instance, are notorious for being antivaccine or at least for giving out advice that, if not blatantly antivaccine, tends to be littered with antivaccine tropes dressed up as “skepticism” and “natural healing.” In the above passage, there are the very common tropes trotted out by quacks of all stripes about “Western” (don’t get me started on the racism inherent in that term) medicine: The claim that doctors “just treat the symptoms, not the cause” (never mind that homeopathy, for instance, is all about treating only symptoms); that “holistic medicine” is somehow a threat to big pharma that pharma must destroy; that “detoxification” cures everything and you can prevent vaccine-preventable disease with diet (expounded on explicitly and in more detail in his incredibly brain dead “rebuttal” to Paul Offit).

The arrogance of ignorance is strong in this one. Very strong. Worse, he’s proud of it and thinks he’s “educated” himself.

Comments

  1. #1 LouV
    January 7, 2015

    Regarding this citation
    According to the pasteur institute in France 98% of immune responses triggered at the early stages of infection are non specific. ,
    being french I found it : http://www.pasteur.fr/recherche/unites/tcruzi/minoprio/French_press.html
    It’s a press release about these articles :
    “A B-cell mitogen from a pathogenic trypanosome is a novel eukaryotic proline racemase”
    Nature Medicine, 1er août 2000

    Bernardo Reina-San-Martin1, Wim Degrave1,2, Catherine Rougeot, Alain Cosson, Nathalie Chamond, Anabela Cordeiro-da-Silva, Mario Arala-Chaves, Antonio Coutinho and Paola Minoprio

    “Lymphocyte Polyclonal Activation : A Pitfall for Vaccine Design against Infectious Agents”
    Parasitology Today, vol 16, no.2, 2000
    Bernardo Reina-San-Martin, Alain Cosson and Paola Minoprio

    I admit however that I know too few about this field to make sense of what is argued about using these articles.

    (For the record, I don’t “trust” pharmaceutical companies.
    Quite a few of my regular sources are people like Ben Goldacre (who criticizes equally Big Pharma and anti-vaxxers) or the independent (entirely paid by suscribers) french journal Prescrire, who is extremely critical of drug industry… but still mostly support vaccination.
    I could also cite Philippe Even and Bernard Debré, who recently published a book, “Guide des 4000 médicaments utiles, inutiles ou dangereux” (Guide on 4000 useful / useless / dangerous drugs), but clearly stated their pro-vaccine stance.
    Basically, don’t assume that people in favor of vaccines aren’t critical of the drug industry please.)

  2. #2 Narad
    January 7, 2015

    Oh, and…

    Why hasn’t the National Institute of health [sic] conducted a study of vaccinated VS unvaccinated kids?

    Please define your terms.

    We could put this to rest in 5 years with that study.

    See above. Pick one specific endpoint. State what measure of not-signal would fully and finally convince you that you’ve been full of beans all along.

    There’s not much point otherwise, now is there?

  3. #3 Narad
    January 7, 2015

    Has that case been adjudicated yet, iliya?

    I think I may be able to play another round of Docket UPDATE (Update, update…) tomorrow.

  4. #4 lilady
    January 7, 2015

    Heh, iliya gets all his information from this loony mom who subjected her daughter Caroline to multiple quack treatments, from multiple quacks including Anju Usman:

    http://www.regardingcaroline.com/history.html

  5. #5 Krebiozen
    January 7, 2015

    iliya,

    Here are 2 movies for everyone to watch. Well done and hard to refute.

    At least two people have taken the trouble to watch these movies and refute them in detail.
    ‘The Greater Good’ has been reviewed here by a doctor well known to this blog, who describes it as “Pure, unadulterated anti-vaccine propaganda masquerading as a ‘balanced’ documentary”.

    The movie is based on three cases of supposed vaccine damage:

    1. Gabi Swank who suffered neurological problems which are blamed on Gardasil even though her symptoms started weeks after being vaccinated. There seems to be no reason for anyone to think Gardasil had anything to do with her problems, given the safety studies and post-marketing surveillance of Gardasil that has found no sign that it causes any serious adverse events.

    2. Jordan King, whose autism parents claimed was caused by vaccines, but the Vaccine Court disagreed, with the Grand Master stating: “I find that it is extremely unlikely that Jordan’s autism was in any way causally connected to his thimerosal-containing vaccines”.

    3. Victoria Grace Boyd Christner, who died tragically at the age of five months. Again there is no reason to link her illness and death to vaccination. There is no doubt at all that vaccines have dramatically reduced the number of children who die like this, so using this child as an example of the damage vaccines do is extremely dishonest.

    ‘Bought’ has also been reviewed, here, by James Cooper who has a Ph.D in chemistry and who describes the movie as “tedious nonsense”, “Full of appalling misinformation”.

    I find it distressing that anyone is taken in by this kind of dangerous nonsense to the extent that they can write, ” I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research. and I am sure there will be no shortage of people to study”.

  6. #6 Iliya
    mke
    January 7, 2015

    May I ask? Do any of you take a multi vitamin, Omega 3, Vit C, Vit D3, Probiotics, antioxidants ETC or are you on a supplement program for you personal health? Do you believe in vitamins or are they a waste of money?

    I need to know this from all of you because it will clarify things for me. We all want the same thing healthy kids and adults. We just think Vaccines are another form of a drug. We think the innate immune system nutritionally supported is the optimal way to raise a baby to live in this world. <—–thats crazy?

    Do the study of vaccinated VS unvaccinated already. It is the ONLY way to know for sure. There is no excuse for this and any reason not to is bullshit and you know it. Vikki your reasons are flimsy like overcooked spaghetti . All you would have to do is contact Barbara Loe Fisher and she could supply 1000's of un vaccinated children and Newborns to test each child and go over there medical records over the last 10 years. You could do an advertisement in a chiropractic or naturopathic newspaper and get all sorts of data from unvaccinated children. the supply of infants is abundant. This is actually an easy study to do. And those of us who know the truth and are not frightened would gladly supply our children in the name of science. And we would be vindicated and the lives of our future children would be saved from this 200 year mistake of vaccinating and its long term permanent side effects. In its place we could implement sound nutrition strategies for long term baby wellness. and get away from Allopathic medicine and its poison.

    There has never been a long term safety study on the current vaccine schedule. Can any of you cite one? I would love to know what these cluster bombs of chemicals are doing? Oh yeah we already know this. We have the sickest generation of children ever, But its definitely not the vaccines. SMH

    Have any of you actually looked at the ingredients in vaccines? My god its terrifying.
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipient-table-2.pdf

    Lets be clear this is injected directly into the muscle of babies who are still not fully developed. Its not ingested so its metabolised completely different. What could possibly go wrong? Answer When you overstimulate a precious little immune system with an array of chemicals its not unreasonable to think you are hyper sensitizing the immune system and that it may malfunction and cause auto immunity. THINK THINK THINK . Its common sense use your intuition you dont need a study to connect the dots. but in case you do not trust yourself

    HERE is your citation

    http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/new-autoimmunity-syndrome-linked-aluminum-vaccines

    #cdcwhistleblower Start following that story its explosive but will likely be settled and swept under the rug to once again protect the medical establishment.

    If vaccines are so safe and effective why can't we SUE the vaccine makers? Did any of you know that?

    In 1986 the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act [14] was passed in response to a large number of lawsuits filed claiming vaccines were causing adverse reactions including brain damage and death. [15] The Act shielded medical professionals and vaccine manufacturers from liability if an individual suffered injury from receiving vaccines. The Act mandated that vaccine injury claims be filed with the US Court of Federal Claims rather than filed directly against physicians or vaccine manufacturers in civil court. Unlike civil court, people filing injury claims are not required to prove negligence or failure to warn; they only need to prove that a vaccine caused injury. [16] On Oct. 1, 1988, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) was created under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. [17] The VICP was "established to ensure an adequate supply of vaccines, stabilize vaccine costs, and establish and maintain an accessible and efficient forum for individuals found to be injured by certain vaccines." [17] Between 1989 and July 1, 2014, 3,645 compensation awards have been made (amounting to over $2.7 billion in awards and $113.2 million to cover legal costs) and 9,786 claims have been dismissed (amounting to $62.8 million paid to 4,925 dismissed claimants to cover legal costs). [17]

    In the end we all have to decide who we are going to trust don't we? Prior to my son being born I already knew the TRUTH about nutrition and was skeptical of the medical establishment and its drugs. Fast forward 15 years and here we go all over again with vaccines and children. This has been the easiest TAKE DOWN I have ever done. But it starts with a fundamental truth nutrition cures!!!!! if you dont believe that your LOST and susceptible to Drugs vaccines and surgery. Thats fucking sad and your being LIED TO

    Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free

  7. #7 Todd W.
    http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com
    January 7, 2015

    @Iliya

    On the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study, read this four-part series of posts that begins here. Then come back and explain how the study could be done, how it could be done ethically, and how it could be done legally.

    On suing manufacturers, these links may be of interest: here and here.

    As for ingredients, there are a couple posts here that may be of interest. The truth will set you free (from the fear in which you live).

    Prior to my son being born I already knew the TRUTH about nutrition and was skeptical of the medical establishment and its drugs.

    Ah, so you admit that you were already convinced of the evils of the medical establishment and seek out information to confirm that bias, rather than questioning your beliefs.

  8. #8 Chris
    January 7, 2015

    iliya: “Chris Many of the precious studies you cite are done by the drug companies themselves. we need independence”

    Prove it. Go through each one of those studies and tell us exactly which drug company paid for with direct quotes from the papers’ conflict of interest statements.

  9. #9 squirrelelite
    January 7, 2015

    For a little background on vaccines and other topics of medical interest, I noticed this book is on special discount from Amazon for the next several days.

    http://www.amazon.com/Immortal-Life-Henrietta-Lacks-ebook/dp/B00338QENI/?_bbid=70640&tag=bookbubemailc-20

  10. #10 herr doktor bimler
    January 7, 2015

    Do any of you take a multi vitamin, Omega 3, Vit C, Vit D3, Probiotics, antioxidants ETC or are you on a supplement program for you personal health? Do you believe in vitamins or are they a waste of money?

    We’re not your friggin’ MLM suckers, iliya.

  11. #11 Iliya
    January 7, 2015

    Chris Do you take any vitamins at all? or are they a waste of money to you? Please answer that. Everyone needs answer that. As for the studies you posted its well known many of them are drug co funded and the article I posted regarding Merck PROVES they manipulate data for there own benefit.

    Yes I am biased against the medical establishment because I know the damn truth its not an opinion Todd. Facts are facts.

    75% of all diseases are caused by lifestyle choices lack of exercise, poor diet, etc and the answer to heal those diereses are not found in Drugs? DUH

    We are not sick because of bad lick bad genes or bad germs. we are sick because of BAD choices. <—–TRUTH
    Epigenetics Proves that.

    So yes I am biased with the truth

    Do vaccines cause injury? The answer according to Vaers
    https://vaers.hhs.gov/index is YES.

    Did nearly $3 billion get paid to victims of vaccines? the answer is YES.

    1 example
    damages Case
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html

    Do drug companies manipulate data? the answer is YES
    http://www.webmd.com/arthritis/news/20080415/study-vioxx-details-manipulated

    Those are facts folks.

    Unethical is the best answer you can give to not do a Vaccinated VS unvaccinated study? My head is exploding at that LAME excuse! There is no shortage of volunteers to vaccinate and study. there is no shortage of volunteers to not vaccinate.and study. Its only unethical to pro vaxxers the rest of us want to know!!!!Thats a nice convenient excuse to parrot and tell yourself for never finding out the TRUTH. SMH

    Congratulations your all delusional now.

    Where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

    There is a plume of smoke around vaccines

  12. #12 justthestats
    January 7, 2015

    @iliya:

    I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research.

    How brave and noble of you to volunteer to sacrifice someone else’s health to satisfy your own curiosity.

  13. #13 justthestats
    January 7, 2015

    @illya: also, why do you trust vitamins, omega 3s and antioxidants when they were discovered by the same medical research system you so distrust when it comes to vaccines?

  14. #14 Narad
    January 7, 2015

    All you would have to do is contact Barbara Loe Fisher and she could supply 1000’s of un vaccinated children and Newborns to test each child and go over there medical records over the last 10 years.

    Oh, she could, could she? How many thousands? What gives you this idea in the first place? What good would “un vaccinated … Newborns” be?

    You don’t seem to be thinking very carefully. Go answer the questions here.

  15. #15 Narad
    January 7, 2015

    ^ For going over “there medical records over the last 10 years,” that is. Perhaps you haven’t even gotten to the point of figuring out what the possible designs are.

  16. #16 JP
    January 7, 2015

    Is anybody else reminded of a certain Dead Milkmen song while perusing iliya’s posts? Yeah, I care about NU-TRI-TIOOOON!”

  17. #17 herr doktor bimler
    January 7, 2015

    All you would have to do is contact Barbara Loe Fisher and she could supply 1000’s of un vaccinated children and Newborns to test each child and go over there medical records over the last 10 years.

    I can’t help wondering why Barbara Loe Fisher hasn’t done the research herself, if she has all these thousands of unvaccinated children and their confidential medical records at her fingertips. Is it just laziness? Like iliya, she wants someone else to do the work?

    What good would “un vaccinated … Newborns” be?
    I would be more interested in cases of infants who were already vaccinated when born.

  18. #18 Sheepmilker
    Effin Freezing!
    January 7, 2015

    Luckily, The Spudd has published something which vindicates Iliya’s preferred type of evidence: thespudd.com/i-just-know-replaces-systematic-reviews-at-top-of-evidence-pyramid/

  19. #19 justthestats
    January 7, 2015

    @Iliya:

    We are not sick because of bad lick bad genes or bad germs. we are sick because of BAD choices. <—–TRUTH
    Epigenetics Proves that.

    Do the DNA phosphorylation or the regulatory proteins do most of the proving? How do the little tiny molecules get their message to the humans?

  20. #20 Narad
    January 7, 2015

    Unethical is the best answer you can give to not do a Vaccinated VS unvaccinated study?

    No. Now quit making an ass out of yourself by just repeating the same old shіt that everyone’s heard before in mangled English and get back to this, as well as a study design.

  21. #21 Chris
    January 7, 2015

    Iliya: “As for the studies you posted its well known many of them are drug co funded and the article I posted regarding Merck PROVES they manipulate data for there own benefit.”

    Prove it. You are making a claim, yet you refuse to actually look at the papers. So which drug company funded Dr. Brent Taylor’s studies that he did at the Royal Free when Wakefield refused to do followup? Do tell.

    “The answer according to Vaers”

    Really? What do you need to read before your enter the official VAERS portal? What are the words after “Please read the following statement on the limits of VAERS data. You MUST click on the box below to access the VAERS database.”? Copy and paste them here, and then tell us what they mean in your own words.

    “Do drug companies manipulate data? the answer is YES”

    Why do you think Vioxx was a vaccine?

    “Unethical is the best answer you can give to not do a Vaccinated VS unvaccinated study?”

    Interesting how someone can demand a certain study design, but cannot be bothered to actually open up a paper on their computer and read it. Somehow he thinks we should accept without question that the studies in the list I provided were all funded by Merck. Or that a self-selected survey like VAERS is final data.

    Iliya, why should we care about your opinion, when you don’t even bother to put up relevant data and screw up the stuff you do post?

  22. #22 iliya
    January 7, 2015

    I will leave you folks to your beliefs and we can agree to disagree. But to suggest its unethical to a study of Vaccinated Vs Unvaccinated is ludacris. For any of you to actually believe that line of thinking with a clean conscious just shows me how far away from seeking the truth you really are and how warped your mind is. Thats pshyco-bable.

    Its unethical for pediatricians to tell uninformed parents that Vaccines are perfectly safe and that the current schedule is safe. When there has NEVER EVER been a long term study done. EVER.

    Its unethical to give infants the HEP B vaccine with out testing the mother for it. this vaccine given on the day of birth is the least justifiable of any vaccine. A child can ONLY get the disease from IV drug abuse, sexual activity with an infected partner, a blood transfusion using contaminated blood, OR from the mother.
    The CDC states:
    ” … because errors or delays in documenting, testing, and reporting maternal HBsAg status can and do occur, administering the first dose of Hepatitis B vaccine soon after birth to all infants acts as a safety net, reducing the risk for perinatal infection when maternal HBsAg status is either unknown or incorrectly documented at delivery. Also, initiating the Hepatitis B vaccine series at birth has been shown to increase a child’s likelihood of completing the vaccine series on schedule.”
    In other words, if you’re pregnant and have tested negative for hepatitis B, it’s advised that you vaccinate your baby anyway, just in case the test was wrong — and because the CDC believes you’re more likely to adhere to their dictated schedule if you start early, just hours after birth.

    Flu Shot
    Its unethical to force Nurses and health care workers to take a shot that even the Cochrane collaboration does not find effective and that its almost impossible to pick the EXACT strain for the new year. It is a heavily guarded secret within the medical establishment (especially within the corridors of the CDC) that the Cochrane Database Review (CDR), considered by many within the evidence-based medical model to be the gold standard for assessing the effectiveness of common medical interventions, does not lend unequivocal scientific support to the belief and/or propaganda that flu vaccines are safe and effective.
    Citation
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20166073

    I can go on and on and on and crush your flimsy arguments. At the end of the day you MUST start with a fundamental truth that you believe based on facts. For me its started with therapeutic optimal levels of nutrition in my blood for 90 days that transformed my health in unbelievable ways. Its backed by science. With that I am able to refute a lot of things like drugs that are unnecessary. If vitamins can replace drugs with no side effects and CURE the illness what does that tell me. It tells me there is an agenda to SQUASH the truth about vitamins. Therefore I cannot trust the medical establishment. Now the topic of vaccines comes up. I research and find out there is a lot misinformation being circulated. Which I have documented in all my postings. I find out The side effects are underreported and explained by coincidence? Conclusion Drugs are not necessary MOST of the time, only for emergencies & acute illness like infection and Vaccines are not necessary.

    Thats my case and the evidence is OVERWHELMING unless of course you just can’t believe Medical doctors and the establishment is wrong. Thats shocking to you isn’t it? Sorry to break the news but yes there are people who make a lot of money on fools keeping them in the dark.

    Its called Money and POWER and the early leaders Hijacked the POLIO vaccine data and manipulated the statistics and used it as the Triumph of medicine and leveraged every other vaccine after it and the MYTH still lives on and you have bought into it hook line and sinker. look him up Bernard Greenberg 1962

    http://www.vaccination.co.uk/questions/q8.htm

    Goodbye and get a clue already. This is too easy

  23. #23 Chris
    January 7, 2015

    “But to suggest its unethical to a study of Vaccinated Vs Unvaccinated is ludacris.”

    Tell that to those who enforce the Belmont Report. I am sure they would love to hear from you about the ethics of medical testing on children. Perhaps you should from a coalition to rewrite it.

    “to the belief and/or propaganda that flu vaccines are safe and effective.
    Citation”

    So is your two week old child already a heath care worker and/or elderly? By the way, there are serious issues with one of the authors.

    “At the end of the day you MUST start with a fundamental truth that you believe based on facts.”

    Which you have failed to provide. I am still waiting for you to prove that all of the studies in the list I gave were paid by drug companies.

    “I research and find out there is a lot misinformation being circulated. Which I have documented in all my postings.”

    Not really. The Dunning/Kruger in you is very strong.

    “MYTH still lives on and you have bought into it hook line and sinker. look him up Bernard Greenberg 1962”

    And yet there is no similarity between polio and meningitis. Real doctors know that, but obviously the chiropractor who runs that website really does not have a clue. Plus he is also deliberately misrepresenting the legacy of Dr. Greenberg. You really ought be ashamed for falling for such nonsense.

  24. #24 Narad
    January 7, 2015

    Goodbye and get a clue already.

    Do stick the flounce.

  25. #25 Gray Falcon
    January 7, 2015

    iliya: “I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research.”

    Bit of advice: Don’t write anything you wouldn’t want to hear repeated at a custody hearing.

  26. #26 justthestats
    January 8, 2015

    But to suggest its unethical to a study of Vaccinated Vs Unvaccinated is ludacris. For any of you to actually believe that line of thinking with a clean conscious just shows me how far away from seeking the truth you really are and how warped your mind is.

    I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research.

    You seem a little confused. Ethical research does not involve sacrificing other people. Not even sacrificing them gladly.

  27. #27 iliya
    January 8, 2015

    If you do not discover for yourselves the POWER of NUTRITION and how its revolutionizing health care you will always be a slave to Drugs, vaccines and surgery kept in the dark right and CONFUSED. Precisely where they want you. Dont be a fool. The info is out there but you must have the right prism to see it. I have nothing more to say about any of this. you nitpick the minutia and thats not where the ideas are.

    Please go seek the truth on nutrition, Epi Genetics and everything will fall into place. and you will finally GET IT. Like many defecting MD’s as well as Chrios and Naturopaths. We are right and you are wrong and its all based on SCIENCE and irrefutable.

    Goodbye and Godbless

  28. #28 Lawrence
    January 8, 2015

    I’m GOING to say a BUNCH of things in random CAPITAL LETTERS to show how IMPORTANT and SMART I am…..

  29. #29 Todd W.
    http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com
    January 8, 2015

    @Iliya

    We are not sick because of bad lick bad genes or bad germs. we are sick because of BAD choices. <—–TRUTH
    Epigenetics Proves that.

    Do show some evidence that “BAD” choices cause measles. Or congenital rubella syndrome. And I’m not talking about bad decisions like foregoing vaccination or asking a sick person to cough on you. Show that “BAD” choices, rather than measles/rubella viruses, cause those illnesses.

  30. #30 Gray Falcon
    January 8, 2015

    Iliya: in Hawaii most of the locals ate healthy food and got plenty of exercise. They were nearly driven to extinction by measles. Why was that?

  31. #31 Todd W.
    http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com
    January 8, 2015

    @Gray Falcon

    Undoubtedly because they made the “BAD” choice of allowing Europeans to introduce them to the evils of “Western” medicine.

  32. #32 shay
    January 8, 2015

    We are right and you are wrong and its all based on SCIENCE and irrefutable.

    Argumentam ad two-year-old.

  33. #33 justthestats
    January 8, 2015

    Please go seek the truth on nutrition

    The truth on nutrition: there are certain things that your body needs you to ingest. Got it.

    Epi Genetics

    The truth on Epi Genetics: DNA transcription gets regulated instead of every cell expressing every gene the exact same amount. Got it.

    Oh, by the way, it’s spelled “epigenetics.”

    and everything will fall into place. and you will finally GET IT.

    Nope, I’m really not seeing how some basic biology stuff is going to suddenly wipe out everything that we know about the human body.

    We are right and you are wrong and its all based on SCIENCE

    Don’t you get it? Drugs, surgery, and vaccines are also based on the exact same SCIENCE, which says that nutrition is important but nutrition + the appropriate use of drugs, surgery, and vaccines is significantly better.

    and irrefutable.

    Well now, that’s where you lose the SCIENCE. Science prefers “not yet refuted,” or more accurately “we haven’t found the flaws in this yet, but there’s probably a better model that makes slightly different, more accurate predictions.”

    BTW, you still haven’t explained why you think that human sacrifice is ethical. Do you tell people that before you agree to watch their kids?

  34. #34 herr doktor bimler
    January 8, 2015

    Goodbye and get a clue already.

    Obligatory.

  35. #35 Krebiozen
    January 8, 2015

    iliya,

    If you do not discover for yourselves the POWER of NUTRITION and how its revolutionizing health care you will always be a slave to Drugs, vaccines and surgery kept in the dark right and CONFUSED.

    What is so different in what diet you recommend and that recommended by my doctor? I’m in the UK and this is what my government tells me I should eat to be healthy. I believe the US recommendations are broadly similar. What is wrong with this, and what evidence do you have for claiming that it is wrong?

    If nutrition is so powerful, why don’t we see a larger effect on health? Three large studies in the UK found no significant effects of diet on mortality, and the EPIC study which has followed more than half a million people for 15 years, has also found surprisingly little correlation between diet and health.

    Another recent study looking at the problem from the other end (as it were) has found that about two thirds of the mutations that lead to cancer are not due to environmental factors or inherited predispositions. These studies suggest that diet, which is an environmental factor, has little effect on cancer, sadly.

    It seems to me you are a True Believer trying to proselytize what looks more like a religion than a science-based approach to nutrition. I know it would be nice to have some sure-fire way of warding off scary diseases, but the evidence tells us that vaccines work far, far better than diet, unless a person is clinically malnourished, which is fairly unusual in the developed world.

  36. #36 MI Dawn
    January 8, 2015

    Huh. I didn’t know that vitamins and such could cure my genetics. And I want to know why the vitamins and calcium *recommended by my doctor* haven’t cured all my ailments. (Due to surgery I am not always able to eat sufficient amounts of foods for good nutrition so my MD recommends vitamins and CA). BUT – I still have labile hypertension (thank you genetics).

    I also don’t waste my time and money on mega-doses, but take what my MD recommends. No MLM for me, either.

    And I am up to date on my vaccines, my children are up-to-date on theirs, and I still wish the chickenpox vaccine had been available before they got it. I image iliya would just love to give HIS kids narcotics like I had to give mine to keep them from being so miserable they couldn’t eat, drink or sleep.

  37. #37 herr doktor bimler
    January 8, 2015

    ludacris . ..a clean conscious … pshyco-bable.

    It is easy to tell when Iliya is copy-pasting spam, as in comments 170 and 187… he suddenly turns literate.

  38. #38 JGC
    January 8, 2015

    We need vaccines for what reason?

    To safely and effectively reduce the incidence of infectious diseases in the population–I thought that was obvious. For example, prior to the varicella vaccine being licensed in 1995, in the US there were roughly 4 million cases of chicken pox every year (mostly in children below the age of 11), resulting in about 13,000 hospitalizations and 100 to 150 deaths.

    From the prevaccination period to 2002, by contrast, hospitalizations due to chicken pox declined by 88 percent and ambulatory visits declined by 59 percent (resulting, BTW, in a decline in estimated direct medical expenditures for chicken pox hospitalizations and ambulatory visits from an average of $84.9 million in 1994 and 1995 to $22.1 million in 2002 (that’s 74%).

    (see PMID:16106004)

  39. #39 JGC
    January 8, 2015

    But to suggest its unethical to a study of Vaccinated Vs Unvaccinated is ludacris.

    No, it’s accurate. First, while unvaxed versus vaxed studies may be (and are) ethically performed to evaluate vaccines for previously unaddressed infectious diseases, a prospective vaxed versus unvaxxed study to examine vacines already approved for usage would require investigators leave the unvaccinated cohort vulnerable to serious illness, injury and death by those infectious diseases. Fortunately, it isn’t necessary to conduct such a studies, as retrospective studies can serve in their stead–and multipel such large, retrospective epidemiological studies, by mulitple independent researchers and public health agencies in multiple nations, have been conducted (See, madsen, DeStefano, Hviid, etc.).

    Its unethical for pediatricians to tell uninformed parents that Vaccines are perfectly safe and that the current schedule is safe.

    Which no one is actually telling parents, are they? Instead all taht’;s being claimed–and accurately–is that the risks associated with routine childhood vaccination have been both well characterized and found to be orders of magnitude lower the the risks associated with remaining vulnerable to nfection by the diseases they protect against.

    Its unethical to give infants the HEP B vaccine with out testing the mother for it. A child can ONLY get the disease from IV drug abuse, sexual activity with an infected partner, a blood transfusion using contaminated blood, OR from the mother.

    I’m sorry, but this quite simply isn’t true. See http://shotofprevention.com/2010/05/06/why-infants-should-receive-the-hepatitis-b-vaccine-at-birth/

    Its unethical to force Nurses and health care workers to take a shot that even the Cochrane collaboration does not find effective and that its almost impossible to pick the EXACT strain for the new year.

    Except they aren’t being forced to take a shot, are they? It may be a condition of employment in many hospitals/medical centers, but that’s hardly the same thing–is it? In fact, many hospitals allow those who wish to be exempt to elect instead wear additional PPE to protect their clients (a mask, for example) from infection.

    For me its started with therapeutic optimal levels of nutrition in my blood for 90 days that transformed my health in unbelievable ways.

    You’re confusing a single personal anecdote with evidence.

    Its backed by science.

    Provide citations to that science, then. So far you’ve offered nothing but unsupported assertion this is the case.

  40. #40 JGC
    January 8, 2015

    The info is out there but you must have the right prism to see it.

    “Info” that one must be in the right frame of mind to find compelling (i.e., that’s only persuasive if viewed through the ‘right prism’) isn’t evidence, but instead articles of faith.

  41. #41 JGC
    January 8, 2015

    We are not sick because of bad lick bad genes or bad germs. we are sick because of BAD choices. <—–TRUTH

    As clearly you’ve been making good choices for a number of years, perhaps you’d be willing to innoculate yourself with a substantial bolus of gonnorhea or syphilis. and prove to us all that sickness is casued by bad choices rather than exposure germs? No?

    Color me unsurprised…

  42. #42 Todd W.
    http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com
    January 8, 2015

    @Iliya

    Unethical is the best answer you can give to not do a Vaccinated VS unvaccinated study? My head is exploding at that LAME excuse! There is no shortage of volunteers to vaccinate and study. there is no shortage of volunteers to not vaccinate.and study.

    You didn’t bother reading the links I provided to you on a vaxed vs. unvaxed study, did you? The only way such a study would be ethical is if we had no clue whether vaccines were effective or ineffective or whether they were safe or harmful. But we do know.

    Further, your suggestion that there are “no shortage of volunteers to vaccinate and study. there is no shortage of volunteers to not vaccinate.and study” illustrates that you do not understand how randomized trials work. If we let people willingly choose which group to be in (vaccinated or unvaccinated), then that introduces biases that would invalidate a prospective study’s results.

    Why don’t you come back when you’ve read those links and learned a little more about study design.

  43. #43 Brian Deer
    January 13, 2015

    The Madsen et al study of MMR safety, published in NEJM in Nov 2002, was vax/unvax.

  44. #44 lilady
    January 13, 2015

    That November 2002 Study which was pubished in the NEJM, authored by Madsen, et al, is available on PubMed (PubMed is your friend):

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12421889

    N Engl J Med. 2002 Nov 7;347(19):1477-82.

    A population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism.

    Madsen KM1, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, Olsen J, Melbye M.
    Author information

    Abstract

    BACKGROUND:

    It has been suggested that vaccination against measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) is a cause of autism.
    METHODS:

    We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all children born in Denmark from January 1991 through December 1998. The cohort was selected on the basis of data from the Danish Civil Registration System, which assigns a unique identification number to every live-born infant and new resident in Denmark. MMR-vaccination status was obtained from the Danish National Board of Health. Information on the children’s autism status was obtained from the Danish Psychiatric Central Register, which contains information on all diagnoses received by patients in psychiatric hospitals and outpatient clinics in Denmark. We obtained information on potential confounders from the Danish Medical Birth Registry, the National Hospital Registry, and Statistics Denmark.

    RESULTS:

    Of the 537,303 children in the cohort (representing 2,129,864 person-years), 440,655 (82.0 percent) had received the MMR vaccine. We identified 316 children with a diagnosis of autistic disorder and 422 with a diagnosis of other autistic-spectrum disorders. After adjustment for potential confounders, the relative risk of autistic disorder in the group of vaccinated children, as compared with the unvaccinated group, was 0.92 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.24), and the relative risk of another autistic-spectrum disorder was 0.83 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 1.07). There was no association between the age at the time of vaccination, the time since vaccination, or the date of vaccination and the development of autistic disorder.

    CONCLUSIONS:

    This study provides strong evidence against the hypothesis that MMR vaccination causes autism.

    Copyright 2002 Massachusetts Medical Society

  45. #45 iliya
    mke
    January 16, 2015

    I want to share this with all of you so that you may have a different perspective on health. A holistic view point. Not the same Dogma we have been taught. Its the weekend and it will add value to your knowledge and perspective on how you see health. Its very powerful. Enjoy! its a gem

  46. #46 Chris
    January 16, 2015

    So, iliya, you are a supplement shill.

    So do tell us which supplements would have protected the over thirty people who caught measles by going to Disney.

    So were the six home schooled siblings who showed up a clinic with measles under nourished? What is your sure fire proven method to prevent measles that does not require you live around those who are fully vaccinated?

  47. #47 Chris
    January 16, 2015

    iliya, do you really think we would really be swayed by a YouTube video from a chiropractor whose webpage is mainly an online store?

  48. #48 Narad
    January 16, 2015

    I want to share this with all of you so…. Enjoy! its a gem

    No, these promises of yours were “gems”:

    I will leave you folks to your beliefs and we can agree to disagree…. Goodbye and get a clue already.

    We are right and you are wrong and its all based on SCIENCE and irrefutable.
    Goodbye and Godbless

  49. #49 iliya
    January 16, 2015

    Just watch the video

  50. #50 iliya
    January 16, 2015

    I had a soft spot for you folks . I figured this guy could help you see what the truth is.

  51. #51 Chris
    January 16, 2015

    iliya, just provide the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that support your claims. A video sales pitch by a chiropractor does not count.

    The truth is that you are a supplement shill, and probably work for that chiropractic clinic.

  52. #52 Narad
    January 16, 2015

    Just watch the video

    No, I simply don’t waste my time with argumentum ab TuaFistula.*

    * I think the pronoun’s sound. And screw macrons.

  53. #53 Narad
    January 16, 2015

    and probably work for that chiropractic clinic

    Wrong country, wrong latitude and longitude.

    MLM scammers work for themselves.

  54. #54 Chris
    January 17, 2015

    “Wrong country, wrong latitude and longitude.”

    Doesn’t matter. iliya probably doesn’t know he is spamming for someone’s company and not getting compensated. He is still trying to get us to link and buy!

  55. #55 iliya
    January 17, 2015

    Every single word he speaks in this video is the TRUTH!
    Why can’t you handle the truth! Because your stuck in your belief that Vaccines Drugs and Surgery are the solutions to long term wellness. You think science and Bitechnology is going to come up with some miracle drug or shot to solve all that ails you. When the reality is found in the food you eat and the choices you make. Why do you continue to bow down at the alter of conventional medicine and MD’s. They are not trained in wellness only sickness.

    Are we healthier now in 2015? FUCK NO!!! and its directly because of sheep that continue to think alternative modalities have no value. Chiros are quacks. Vitamins dont work, we sell snake oil. Traditional Chinese medicine which includes Herbs and have been around for 5000 years are considered pseudoscience? Really? for the love of god WAKE UP!!!!!

    pseudoscience is pushing a flu vaccine with 23% efficacy.

    I thought I would be nice and let this Doctor explain a different viewpoint and hopefully open your mind to a broader scope of health. There are multiple medical modalities in treating health not just Drugs vaccines and surgery. Not only is this video not selling anything nor am I. If you would like me to watch a video of yours I will gladly review it and give you feedback. I challenge any of you to refute just 1 point in this video. just 1 that you think is false. There are none. I will bet you cannot refute a single point this guy makes. Not 1

    Think I am wrong read how clueless MD’s are when it comes to diet and nutrition.

    .http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/health/16chen.html?_r=0

  56. #56 squirrelelite
    January 18, 2015

    Sorry, Iliya, but science is based on testing claims against reality that can be verified by different people in different countries.

    That way you can find out what really works, not just what you think works. And the results of those tests are published in scientific (and medical) journals, not YouTube or the New York Times.

    And traditional Chinese medicine is woefully short on proven results that it can successfully treat any non-self limiting disease.

    But, you’re welcome to provide the Pubmed index for a result that shows otherwise.

    The argument from antiquity that you make basically amounts to an assertion that “we figured it out thousands of years ago and haven’t bothered to try to make it better since then.”

    So would you please answer these questions?

    What has been the single biggest improvement in TCM in the last 50 years?

    What treatment method that is part of TCM has been abandoned or replaced because it was shown to be less effective or had more side effects than an alternative?

  57. #57 Chris
    January 18, 2015

    iliya, you forgot to respond to this query: “So do tell us which supplements would have protected the over thirty people who caught measles by going to Disney. ”

    Just to let you know, measles is not the same as influenza.

  58. #58 Vicki
    January 18, 2015

    We are healthier than in the past. We live longer, very few people are paralyzed by polio, and it is no longer ordinary for women to die in childbirth.

  59. #59 Krebiozen
    January 18, 2015

    iliya,

    I want to share this with all of you so that you may have a different perspective on health.

    I was curious so I started watching this, but I was put off by the very first thing Chestnut said: “We’re getting sicker and sicker instead of healthier and healthier.” This is one of the pillars of the so-called natural health movement, the idea that we are all being poisoned by our diets, by pollutants, by GMOs, by vaccines or whatever so we are all succumbing to chronic diseases and either dying younger or, when you point out this isn’t true, that we live longer but in a state of ill health.

    It isn’t true. Not only has life expectancy been increasing in the developed world, quality-adjusted life expectancy has been increasing too, by about 2 years just between 1987 and 2008. Not only are people living longer, they are active for longer too.

    I wonder if it is simply that people tend to experience more illness as they get older, and instead of seeing it as a sign of ageing, they see it as an overall trend.

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