Pharyngula

Posted by: Phro | September 27, 2009 12:38 AM

My impression, thus far, is that the threat of the piggy death is less threatening and more annoying, but the complete avoidance of the vaccine seems...questionable? (I'm being polite.)

But I live in Japan, where masks have been sold out for months (despite any evidence that they actually help) and schools are closed down for a week or more if two or more students have confirmed cases. To me, that seems like drastic overreaction, so I wonder if I have a skewed view of things.

I'm also curious...exactly how dangerous could a vaccination be!?!? I thought most vaccinations were essentially dead viruses, so the body could identify the virus and make antibodies before actually contracting the virus. Am I wrong?

Posted by: Tomecat | September 27, 2009 12:48 AM

Nope, what a ridiculous misdirection.

Apparently, the meaning of caution with regard to vaccinations is: do not get a vaccination BUT DO: wash your hands (a lot, but not too much--how much is for you to figure out), take vitamins (some, but not too many--amounts may vary per person), sleep enough (but not too much), exercise (more than you already are, no matter how much that is), DO NOT GET STRESSED (how this may be accomplished is individually differentiated), and eat only those foods which do not adversely affect you. If you can follow these simple instructions, they you will be content and fulfilled forever.

Posted by: mtgap.wordpress.com | September 27, 2009 12:51 AM

Swine flu is basically like regular flu, this guy says. But would he not recommend getting a vaccination for regular flu? (Well, I personally wouldn't get one because I never get the flu, but you know what I mean.)

Posted by: raven | September 27, 2009 1:11 AM

* Did you know that criminal charges are being filed in multiple countries as well as with the FBI against the WHO / UN for conspiring to decimate the human population with a reverse engineered virus concoction to be delivered via a global mass mandatory vaccination program in the fall of 2009?

Did you know that the swine flu vaccine is a genetically engineered virus designed to kill billions of people as part of a Illuminati./UN depopulation program?

Vaccination will be global and mandatory starting a few days ago.

By next summer the world population will be down from 6.7 billion to 2 billion or less due to a mandatory vaccine program with a man made lethal virus.

You would know all this and more if you read the anti-vaxxer sites. These clowns just write fiction. I see one of these every few days.

Posted by: gyeong-hwa | September 27, 2009 1:18 AM

Did you know that criminal charges are being filed in multiple countries as well as with the FBI against the WHO / UN for conspiring to decimate the human population with a reverse engineered virus concoction to be delivered via a global mass mandatory vaccination program in the fall of 2009?

Aren't those the same people who thinks that the CIA/FBI are following them because "they know too much" and also think we should listen to them because "they know too much"?
lol
These anti-vaxxers just want people to hear them talk and feed their ego.

Posted by: raven | September 27, 2009 1:24 AM

but I was under the impression that, in some instances, vaccines can cause negative reactions. (Not like "it gaved me bahbee the dumbs!".)

Sure. There is no such thing as a medical intervention without side effects. None, not a single one. Aspirin kills around 30,000 people in the USA every year. Tylenol can and does destroy kidneys and livers.

Based on previous pandemics, the swine flu will kill between 1 and 2 million people worldwide and more will suffer permanent lung damage from ARDS and being ventilated in an ICU for weeks on end.

It's all about risk/benefit. I generally don't get a seasonal flu shot and get seasonal flu fairly often, like last year. Freaking airports are a great source of winter viruses. I will get a swine flu shot. This new virus isn't real deadly but it isn't like quite like seasonal flu either. Most will get it and get over it, some will get amazingly sick and end up in the ICU, and a few will die.

Use your best judgment, roll the dice, and hope. If you want guarantees, move to another planet.

Posted by: Brian | September 27, 2009 1:44 AM

Of course the placebo effect is real. It's very real. Could the placebo effect reduce the risk of contracting flu? Well, that's a different question and I personally don't know if any reliable studies have been done there.

Posted by: Phro | September 27, 2009 1:56 AM

Raven:

Thanks for the reply. Just to clarify, I'm not looking for guarantees, but I'm really curious as if there is any possible validity to concerns over the the vaccine. I don't think there is, but I'm just curious out of an intellectual concern. I don't plan on getting the vaccine as I'm pretty young and very rarely get sick.

Though, now that I think about it, that doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot. Still, the low number of deaths (relatively speaking) is providing me with enough of a sense of security to justify not worrying.

When I sprout a snout and topple over oinking, we'll know I was wrong. :)

Posted by: greg | September 27, 2009 2:13 AM

i've always thought "PuffingtonHost" was a better name for that site. "PuffHo" is even better.

Posted by: Tmax01 | September 27, 2009 2:22 AM

Rorschach:

"otherwise she would prevent such garbage from being published."

This was a surprisingly good piece given the kind of crap they've published before. Most people don't get the seasonal flu shots every year, so I wouldn't go so far as to say that recommending against getting the swine flu shot constitutes de facto malpractice. Homeopathy? Sure, that's malpractice without question. But even thought this article was mostly woo and hooey, I have to admit some sympathy for a "no, we don't all need to get vaccinated against H1N1 - it is mostly overblown hype" position.

Now, let me point out that as I write this my sister-in-law is in the hospital with severe flu (and in the first term of pregnancy). She had gotten immunized against seasonal flu several days before coming down with a severe illness. I read last week that some scientists were in a stink about the ability to release some findings of a paper still in peer review that indicates getting the seasonal flu vaccine might make people more susceptible to swine flu for a few days. Reporting that people who've gotten flu shots have a slightly increased chance of contracting swine flu might have certainly affected my sister-in-law's decision to get a flu shot, but is reporting such potentially scary results before the paper has been peer reviewed more or less ethical than the alternative?

It all gets pretty complicated. Not even PZ's answers are always right, as easy as they might be to agree with. HuffPo is news media, like any other: it is a source of information, not authority. I check their front page routinely and often find terrific stuff (be sure to read anything by Jason Links, their Eat The Press section editor) on the site. But I only usually read anything in their 'health & wellness" pages, ironically, when PZ complains about it. Like the sports section in a hardcopy daily, it is something I'm willing to ignore without criticizing.

Posted by: Rorschach | September 27, 2009 2:31 AM

tmaxPA misrepresenting @ 20,

Most people don't get the seasonal flu shots every year, so I wouldn't go so far as to say that recommending against getting the swine flu shot constitutes de facto malpractice.

Which is of course not what I suggested.I was referring to the potential of high-risk patients taking the good doctor's advice and munch garlic and Vitamin D instead of getting vaccinated.

Posted by: Rorschach | September 27, 2009 2:54 AM

ICU's around Australia were full with pregnant women this winter, if you are in that group you should get vaccinated.

getting the seasonal flu vaccine might make people more susceptible to swine flu for a few days.

I think this is highly unlikely, although I'm no immunologist of course.And you didnt tell us what strain of flu she actually has.Best wishes to her though.

Posted by: Kitty | September 27, 2009 4:46 AM

I will be having my seasonal flu jab on Wednesday - even a head cold triggers asthma and bronchitis resulting in weeks of misery. I have the jab every year along with millions of others and am very grateful for it, thank you NHS. I occasionally get a sore arm.
If I'm offered the swine flu jab when it's available in a month or so I'll have that too.
Since the jab became routinely available to vulnerable groups I've not had flu and I really want to keep it that way.

Posted by: Wowbagger, Man-Hating Man of Pharyngula | September 27, 2009 5:05 AM

For any of the Australians here, Darwin's Dangerous Idea is on SBS tonight at 9.30.

Posted by: PhysicistDave | September 27, 2009 6:14 AM

Arianna first made a name for herself out here in California as the supposed intellect behind a *conservative* GOP wannabe Senator, her former husband Mike Huffington (who eventually “came out” as gay – hence “former” husband).

Having failed to ply her trade successfully on the right side of the political spectrum, she is now seeing how good the johns are on the left side.

The customers change; the oldest profession does not.

But, she has a big enough crew of contributors that, sometimes, HuffPo does have an interesting post.

Dave

Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage | September 27, 2009 7:17 AM

My employer offers flu vaccinations every year. They'd rather pay for inoculations than sick pay. I'll be taking the H1N1 vaccine this year.

You've never had the typhoid vaccine, have you?

When I was in the Navy I was vaccinated against diseases I'd never heard of. Militaries are great believers in vaccinations. World War I was the first major war in which more soldiers were killed by enemy action than died of disease.

Posted by: shonny | September 27, 2009 8:11 AM

A bit harsh, Doc?

Although Lipman is an 'integrative physician' which I take as being one that is given to add woo in his practice, he doesn't sound too delirious.
As to HuffPo, - seems like a hit 'n miss affair, but since reading it doesn't cost anything except a bit of time (sometimes wasted), I can't see anything much to get worked up over.

And last, but not least, I stay healthy by not worring too much about ANYTHING. Getting somewhat annoyed is my max level of excitement these days. Having no dominatrix surely helps!

Posted by: Matt "Nora" Penfold | September 27, 2009 8:16 AM

When I was in the Navy I was vaccinated against diseases I'd never heard of. Militaries are great believers in vaccinations. World War I was the first major war in which more soldiers were killed by enemy action than died of disease.

Only on the Western Front.

In the East, Turkey, Africa and The Middle East disease was still the number one killer.

Posted by: The Science Pundit | September 27, 2009 8:51 AM

And then there's our friend Bill Maher

If u get a swine flu shot ur an idiot.

Posted by: Walton | September 27, 2009 9:08 AM

I would be more than happy to join the HuffPo boycott, except for the fact that I never read the damn HuffPo anyway. It's a pile of blithering nonsense - leftie politics of the most idiotic knee-jerk kind,* "spiritual" woo, and bad scientific and medical advice.

*I'm not bashing left-wingers for the sake of it here. I read plenty of left-leaning blogs; it's important to get a balanced perspective. The HuffPo, however, is not worth the effort. (Nor is Salon.com, which is almost as bad.)

Posted by: GBJ | September 27, 2009 9:54 AM

How do you send feedback at HuffPo?

Posted by: jimvj | September 27, 2009 10:36 AM

Will anyone at the upcoming AAI convention call out Bill Maher for his ludicrous support of quackery?

Orac has been asking this question for a while. I hope some AAI'er has the cajones.

Posted by: RogerJH | September 27, 2009 10:47 AM

Hey PZ,

It's a shame that such a widely read media outlet such as the Huffington Post should spread misinformation. I entirely agree with you that it should be admonished for such.
But is calling for a boycott the most effective way of addressing such malfeasance?

With all due respect, the loss of your audience from HuffPo's readership would be barely a blip on their visitor stats (about 7M a month).

But your readers are smart, opinionated and articulate. And they like to post comments! Wouldn't a more constructive approach be to get them to comment on the article and other bad science they see on HuffPo?

You've done a great job marshaling support to beat down anti-evolution polls. How cool to apply the principle to attack bad science in the popular media.

Posted by: Kristjan Wager | September 27, 2009 10:51 AM

RogerJH, several of the medical bloggers here on ScienceBlogs have taken Huffington Post to task for their medical blogging in the past, yet not only has this not lead to an improvement of the quality, but there has actually been an increase in the woo they write.

See e.g. White Coat Underground's A new low at HuffPo for a recent post doing exactly what you suggested.

Alternatively, try using the search option here at ScienceBlogs, and see how many blog post that have already addressed the quarckery that is Huffington Post.

Posted by: TX CHL Instructor | September 27, 2009 11:32 AM

I'm impressed that PZ would be anti-HufPo; shows intelligent thought. I occasionally follow PZ, although I usually find the "Liberal Dittoheads" that populate the comments section to be somewhat tiresome. However, the 'flavor' of this blog appears to have improved. Maybe that is due to the new requirement for an authenticated signon.

About 85% of what "Dr" Lipman says in the article is actually reasonably beneficial. Another 10% is probably not directly harmful. But after encountering the word 'homeopathic' at the bottom of the post, it was instantly clear the Lipman is not actually an MD, or, for that matter, a person with an advanced degree in anything remotely resembling science.
--
www.chl-tx.com

Posted by: BlueIndependent | September 27, 2009 11:43 AM

Unfortunately I have to agree with PZ's assessment of HuffPo, as much as I vote Democratic. They can be very schizophrenic, having a few good articles interspersed amongst the worst sub-tabloid pablum. Other papers seem to have a similar sort of reputation, but they earned it when the internet wasn't around so in their case it's kind of seen as a trait and not a negative.

I recall one item they had last week or the week before where a HuffPo Blogger was decrying an admittedly very bad and tasteless column by a sports writer who claimed that recently escaped kidnapping victim Dugard's life was so horrible because she had missed out on so many great sports moments. It was the sort of obtuse thing that pretty much only a right-wing moron would write or care about. But the blogger on HuffPo proceeded to then write the most unintelligible angry response, which was probably the worst and most embarrasing blog post I've ever seen written by anyone remotely affiliated with my political views. That he managed to make himself look worse in print than the loser he was criticizing was pretty bad IMO.

I pretty much have to use HuffPo for what it is: A conduit to news stories on other outlets.

Posted by: shonny | September 27, 2009 11:50 AM

Posted by: Cowcakes Author Profile Page | September 27, 2009 8:32 AM 8) Eat lots of garlic, it works as a broad spectrum antibiotic. - How in bloody hell is an antibiotic going to stop you getting a virus. By making such a simplistic statement that people will associate with a Medical antibiotic its no wonder there's so much resistance to them by infection agents.

Ah, but you get the virus from others, and by munching garlic in quantity you can be pretty sure that your social circle will be a lot wider.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage | September 27, 2009 12:13 PM

Chiroptera,

I was just tweaking TX CHL Instructor. He is a genuine right wing wacko who doesn't post here often.

Posted by: Dust | September 27, 2009 12:24 PM

Nanahuatzin 2 25....There is on curious side efect ot that Vaccine...Those inoculated in 1976, are inmune to the 2009(H1N1) strain....!!

Thats interesting...I received one of those vacs as was in Basic Training for the US Air Force at the time. As a new recruit I received many other vacs as well. Don't remember becoming sick because of them, but many in my Flight and in other Flights did. Perhaps the effect of lots of vacs, being away from home (the first time for many) and the stress of Basic contributed.

Have occassionally got a flu vac since then, but haven't come down with the flu wether vacc'd or not.

Oh, and renamming HuffPo as PuffHo....Brillant! (thanks Greg)

Posted by: Abelard | September 27, 2009 12:30 PM

Dr. Harriet Hall demolishes these quacks:

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/09-09-23

Posted by: leepicton | September 27, 2009 12:45 PM

While you are at it, get a pneumonia vaccination. You only need one. After the husbeast and I both came down with it nearly simultaneously, we never wanted to go through anything like that again. We were not all that sick sick, but with fever and an incapacitating listlessness that made any diversion while lying in bed acceptable. We even watched Oprah and Dr. Phil. Sick enough.
With Husbeast having ALS, that puts him in the high risk group, and as his caregiver, I also need the flu shots. Fortunately the ALS clinic at Hopkins dispenses them at no charge to us. In the last few years, neither one of us has come down with the flu, though I am sure our avoidence of crowds during the winter months has something to do with it.

Posted by: SEF | September 27, 2009 12:55 PM

how can you be allergic to alcohol?

Well it certainly didn't require any effort on my part! As near as I can figure, I was born that way. Even breathing the fumes is very bad for me.

I'm not even the only person with that allergy. My father used to complain (ie he's long dead now!) of a streaming cold whenever he'd been to a business party involving alcohol. It was my mother who figured out the connection (since it was far too rapid and specific an onset of symptoms and was about the only time he had the opportunity for drinking much and he'd always sold his navy rum ration to his ship-mates). A friend of mine has also met someone else with the same allergy - and felt the need to tell me they no longer thought I was quite as weird as previously!

The egg allergy is certainly much more common though. And a lot of vaccines involve using eggs (ie chick embryos). So there should be a fair number of people in the population for whom vaccinations are intrinsically dangerous on that count alone.

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | September 27, 2009 1:08 PM

That's because fewer libertarians and right-wing wackos have been posting here.

Well, I'm still here, though I suppose I've grown a little more moderate.

Posted by: SEF | September 27, 2009 1:15 PM

AFAIK there is no actual allergy to alcohol

[mode=pantomime] Oh yes there is! [/pantomime]

It's rarer than the other alcohol problems though. For the record, I get the severe breathing difficulties, instant headache/nausea, stomach symptoms (if I've been foolish enough to ingest even so much as a ripe apple!) and the collapsing in a heap from hypotension / anaphylaxis version - not the mere red-in-the-face version.

Posted by: dustycrickets | September 27, 2009 1:32 PM

"I don't think there's much indication that feeling confident helps fight off a virus, though." @ #67

What about stress ?
Hasn't stress been proven to weaken the immune system or is that a myth ?

Isn't "feeling confident" less stressful than felling vulnerable?

Posted by: SEF | September 27, 2009 1:46 PM

@ NoR:

Even your own choice of website supports my position in admitting that there are rare cases of allergy to alcohol:

Ethanol as a cause of hypersensitivity reactions to alcohol

If hypersensitivity reactions are experienced after the ingestion of small amounts of any type of alcohol, an allergic reaction to ethanol is likely.

Pure ethanol allergy is very rarely documented and the mechanism is not yet fully understood.

The type of alcohol doesn't matter in my case (nor does it have to be ingested in the conventional sense). This rules out the possibility that additives are the real issue. I have to stay right away from perfumes as well as pubs.

Posted by: baroncognito | September 27, 2009 4:24 PM

I find homeopathic medicine quite useful for my headaches a good 95% of the time.

Entirely unrelated note: 95% of my headaches are caused by dehydration.

Also, the masks have been shown to help prevent the transmission of the flu, provided the people with the flu are the ones wearing the mask. It works similarly to using a handkerchief to cover your mouth and nose when you sneeze or cough.

Posted by: baroncognito | September 27, 2009 5:34 PM

I take a couple litres if I'm feeling really bad. Sometimes I combine the water and the sugar ones. They come in a bottle with the label "Sports Drink"

Posted by: Glen Davidson | September 27, 2009 7:31 PM

I have to agree with the title. They're censorious jerks who prevent a real discussion through their arbitrary "moderation" and prissy notions of what should and should not be said.

They're worthless impediments to getting to truth and honesty.

And Typepad, along with Seed for requiring registration through sucky logon procedures, can also die!

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p

Posted by: raven | September 27, 2009 9:13 PM

WHEN PIGS FLY - What is an Epidemic? | Dade County Surf Forecast ... Aspirin kills 5-6 people EVERY DAY in the USA alone. ... 30000 Deaths each year from over the counter drugs like Advil, Tylenol, etc… ... dadecosurf. com /node/505 - Cached - Similar

That 30K might be deaths from all OTC drugs combined. Not too sure getting medical stats from the dadeco surf forecast is all that reliable, but it was what google tossed up.

Posted by: RamziD | September 27, 2009 9:29 PM

Oh yeah, pregnant women are another high-risk group.

Posted by: Coldwell | September 27, 2009 10:14 PM

You've got to be kidding me. Did PZ even read the article? All this guy is doing is advocating a healthy diet and lifestyle and warning people against taking an vaccine that hasn't proven it self. And yes, vaccine manufacturers have been insulated from liability by the government so if something goes wrong hopefully you can hold out until Obama's health care plan kicks in. I think alternative medicine is worthless just like most of you but PZ is really stretching it here. More so then usual.

Posted by: mythusmage | September 27, 2009 11:26 PM

Haven't read them all---you characters do talk at length, so this may repeat what others have already said.

That said, it is my understanding that while Swine Flu is not as dangerous as all the hoopla, it is more dangerous than seasonal flu. As with seasonal flu there are susceptible populations who can---and usually do---suffer more from an infection that most of us will.

The old, the young, pregnant women, people with chronic respiratory ailments. Those are the folks most at risk the last I heard, and so the ones who really need to get vaccinated. The H1N1 virus is especially harmful to those with impaired respiratory systems, more so than most seasonal flu strains.

In short, get vaccinated if your doc recommends it, stay home if you come down with anything, and practice basic hygiene. And should somebody recommend a homeopathic remedy, keep in mind that there are much cheaper ways to stay hydrated.

Posted by: Ray Moscow | September 28, 2009 6:00 AM

That linked HuffPost article is terrible.

So, some very slight risk from the vaccination is supposedly worse than the near certainty that tens of thousands (and quite possibly many times more) of unvaccinated people will die of this disease?

Can the families of those who die sue that stupid "Integrative Physician"?

Posted by: amphiox | September 28, 2009 3:14 PM

Most of the deaths that can be attributed to ASA and other NSAID use are going to be from the complications of bleeding (gastrointestinal and elsewhere) since these medications inhibit blood clotting (platelet function). Those taking the medication chronically are most at risk, which would include those taking ASA for heart attack and stroke prevention, and NSAIDs for chronic pain and inflammatory disorders. Those taking the medications for short-term pain relief will be least at risk.

The thing these statistics can't tell us, and which we can never know for certain, is how many of those people who die from the complications of ASA and NSAIDs would have died earlier from the complications of heart disease, stroke, etc if they had not taken the medication. If you are in effect trading a death in five years from heart attack with a death in fifteen years from gastrointestinal bleeding, I do not think it fair or valid to call the death in fifteen years from the bleeding a death "caused" by the medication.

Posted by: Ichthyic | September 28, 2009 3:44 PM

'Look out, it's a grizzly!'

'Oh don't worry, he's completely organic!'"

...the last words of Timothy Treadwell?