…and this is a 
Sorry, there's another piece there that really irritated me. Maher reads the data selectively: he quotes the CDC's list of possible contaminants of vaccines, like aluminum, insect repellant, formaldehyde, etc. But that is simple honesty in advertising! Everything you put in your body contains at least some trace amounts of environmental contaminants; if you freak out over the fact that insects have crawled over the organic and chemical components of food and drug manufacture, don't look at the FDA description of what you might find in a jar of peanut butter. And especially don't look at the crap that you'll find in the unregulated herbal and organic nutritional supplements that Maher probably considers just wonderful.
So Maher just looks at a tiny piece of the detailed information that the CDC presents about the vaccine. He must think they're some kind of sophisticated authority on this matter, or why doesn't he simply dismiss everything that the CDC says because they're pawns of Big Pharma?
Here's a suggestion. Read the CDC's recommendations and explanations of the swine flu and its vaccine. Read the whole thing. That's where you'll find the settled medical science, with overall results and recommendations, and reasonable discussions of the reservations. Maher is not an informed source at all. He's bought into quackery and is searching for rationalizations.
Orac is breathing fire over this, as expected. He points out that Maher's litany of ingredients isn't just from the CDC's list, but also comes from another site: that lunatic radio personality, Jeff Rense.
Medicine & Health
Comments
Posted by: Michael | October 17, 2009 3:01 PM
Why is he freaking out about that? I bet he probably drinks alcohol, which is essentially poison.
Posted by: tim gueguen | October 17, 2009 3:01 PM
But rat poop and bug parts are natural, so they aren't bad for you like those horrible chemicals like sodium chloride.
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
October 17, 2009 3:02 PM
The thing is, Maher doesn't know science. He's not trained in it, and he hasn't learned it on his own.
And yes, it takes some time to get the feel for scientific context, while he's just blithering on about the parts. This is very much like creationists, who I have never once seen address evolution as a whole, only as parts (Behe definitely included).
Of course Maher is doing what the creationists do, he came to a "conclusion" without understanding science or evidence, and he simply follows his confirmation bias. He can't learn science while doing so, any more than the IDiots can, so as long as he's wedded to BS, he'll pick and choose his evidence to fit his prejudices.
What amazes me about these people is that they seem to have no sense that they have anything to learn, and thus have no desire to do so.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 17, 2009 3:07 PM
Not only that but he smokes pot.
Posted by: Sclerophanax
|
October 17, 2009 3:09 PM
I wonder if the required dose of vaccine could, at worst, contain more harmful contaminants than a single serving of fish.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 17, 2009 3:11 PM
Yep, that's right up there with dihydrogen monoxide, or pentahydroxyhexanal.Posted by: Damien Trotter | October 17, 2009 3:12 PM
I bet he even partakes of di-hydrogen monoxide. I'm told that an overdose feels as though one is drowning.
DT
Posted by: SEF
|
October 17, 2009 3:17 PM
I was particularly taken recently to come across a list of approved levels of contaminants in chocolate (bars). There was a certain number of beetle casings which were allowed to be present per portion (100g?), rodent hairs and droppings and other such delightful stuff.
Posted by: Orac
|
October 17, 2009 3:23 PM
It's called the "toxin gambit," PZ, an old and common trope used by anti-vaccine loons.
I'm just relieved Maher didn't use the old "antifreeze" and "aborted fetal parts" gambits, as well. Well, not really. I will admit, though, the "pesticide" gambit is a new one on me. I looked it up and will discuss it in a post...
Posted by: woozy
|
October 17, 2009 3:24 PM
The thing is, Maher doesn't know science. He's not trained in it, and he hasn't learned it on his own.
As are most people. I wouldn't go so far as to call what he's doing similar to creationists' actions. He's currently unconvinced and holding to his selected impressions but I don't think he's completely closeminded or adhering to a bottom-line dogma despite reality glaring him in the face. More importantly, I don't think he's insisting that he is absolutely correct and vaccinationists are absolutely wrong.
Of course, I'm being forgiving because he's usually "one of ours".
I guess I don't mind people having doubts and being skeptical and being hard to convinced. That's as it should be.
Posted by: Lynna
|
October 17, 2009 3:24 PM
It's not just science that can be difficult to get a handle on if you are a non-scientist, but statistics as well. Maher's point about a 100,000 people per year dying of medical errors made in hospitals should be presented next to the number of people who are treated in hospitals per year. And how many people treated in hospitals would have died without that treatment?
Naturally, no one wants to be one of those 100,000 dead -- and efforts to reduce those numbers should be lauded. But to present the number without statistical context is misleading.
Posted by: frankosaurus
|
October 17, 2009 3:31 PM
well Maher would say one can choose not to eat peanut butter, but one can choose to smoke pot or kill oneself by swallowing bleach. The reason vaccinations are singled out is because of the greater trust and complacency people have over regulated neceessities, like medicine and health. So it's a culture of dependency he's after. No one is dependant on peanut butter, though consumers may be dependant on the information provided about what's in it, which is regulated by the government...which they depend on.
So I think that's his real message often, however badly argued. He sees a culture of dependency, which is why he's not afraid to be anti-rational or be contradictory. He doesn't care about people being "enlightened", he only cares about people (well, mostly himself) being "enslaved" and that's what unites his other interests as well. And that's also why that though he rejects religion, he is no ally of truth. Not liking being pushed around is a personality quirk that he and his audience share, but not the basis of any kind of political or rational order. It would be nice if he were to fess up to this.
Posted by: woozy
|
October 17, 2009 3:46 PM
He doesn't care about people being "enlightened", he only cares about people (well, mostly himself) being "enslaved" and that's what unites his other interests as well. And that's also why that though he rejects religion, he is no ally of truth.
That's a little black and white don't you think? While I oppose creationism because it's simply *false*, I reject religion because it "pushes people around". I don't care if people want to believe in silly stuff. I don't even care if by some wierd circumstance that silly stuff turned out to be true.
Not liking being pushed around is a personality quirk that he and his audience share, but not the basis of any kind of political or rational order.
What do you mean? Not wanting to be pushed around is the second most common basis of political order. The most common being wanting to push other people around.
Posted by: Sili
|
October 17, 2009 3:57 PM
See, that's the beauty of it. Not being regulated means there's no where to find the information. It's not required. Just wonderful.Posted by: lordshipmayhem
|
October 17, 2009 3:57 PM
Actually, there is an acceptable level of bug parts in commercial peanut butter.
Which reminds me, I need groceries. I'm not looking as forward to that task as I was before I was reminded of Things I'd Rather Not Know.
Posted by: Mena | October 17, 2009 4:09 PM
Orac@9: Someone at Phil Plait's blog (I can't find the right post, and their search function sucks over there) used the aborted fetal parts argument against the H1N1 vaccine a week or so ago. Oh, those horrible diploid cells have to come from somewhere, it has to be from aborted fetuses since the FDA has banned snakes, snails, and puppy dog tails. Other horrible things that this guy found that was in it were chicken and duck eggs and glycerol. Oh, the horror...
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 17, 2009 4:16 PM
Oh, no. That's enough to make an actress (or actor) tear up and cry...Posted by: NixNoctua
|
October 17, 2009 4:16 PM
Pfft, insects. I once drank a can o' soda that had ants crawling all over it*. Good source of protein.
*Of course, I didn't figure that out until after I took a sip.
-----
Getting a little more on topic, people really shouldn't be sympathetic to Maher just because he's an atheist. Not only is that stupid, but apparently he doesn't even acknowledge that he is one.
Posted by: St.B | October 17, 2009 4:18 PM
Contaminant issues and the actual efficacy of vaccines are separate issues. Labs with low standards and poor hygiene skills aren’t a basis for throwing the vaccine “baby” out with the bathwater. His “tinfoil” hat is just as shiny as many of those he disdains. He should use the same logical skepticism when addressing science based issues that he uses with politicians. Or at least research it with the same vigor to get the ultimate laugh. Truth is better than fiction, funnier too.
Posted by: titmouse
|
October 17, 2009 4:19 PM
Vaccines make the aborted baby Jesus cell cultures cry.
Posted by: frankosaurus
|
October 17, 2009 4:22 PM
"That's a little black and white don't you think"
I don't think he's unlike most people, operating between poles.
"Not wanting to be pushed around is the second most common basis of political order."
well strictly speaking,on its own, it's the most common basis of wanting to be a hermit, which is anti-political. but this is off what I meant anyway. What I mean is that the errors Bill slip into is rooted in his conviction of not wanting to be dependent on authority, and that dependency is a result of being vulnerable to deception - as we see from him, this value can often just makes him more vulnerable to deception (eg, when he arbitrarily creates authorities to reject like "western medicine").
"I reject religion because it "pushes people around"
Same reason Mao rejected it, and because it was "poisonous". But I know what you mean. I'm only adding a footnote, not a challenge.
Posted by: titmouse
|
October 17, 2009 4:25 PM
Maher is now compounding his arrogance of ignorance with the uglier crime of willful ignorance.
There are books. There are scientists and doctors willing to explain.
Ah well. At least we now can see what the man is made of.
I remain disturbed by the fact that I seemed to care more about the meaning of the Richard Dawkins Award than Richard Dawkins.
Posted by: Elwood Herring | October 17, 2009 4:33 PM
Please guys, don't put me off peanut butter. I'll starve to death.
Posted by: Orac
|
October 17, 2009 4:35 PM
I would. That's exactly what Maher is doing. He's sowing doubt, cherrypicking information, relying on stuff that clearly comes from crank sites. For instance, his latest and greatest gambit, the "pesticides in teh vaccines" gambit, happened to be one I hadn't heard of before. So I did a bit of digging. It's really about an adjuvant that isn't even being used in the U.S. and comes straight from the craziest, most irrational part of the anti-vaccine underground:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/10/the_2009_recipient_of_the_richard_dawkin_1.php
Posted by: St.B | October 17, 2009 4:35 PM
@Elwood Herring, #23, Just stick with extra crunchy, you won't notice the "extras". ;)
Posted by: SC, OM | October 17, 2009 4:36 PM
No. He's willfully ignorant and refusing to look honestly at the evidence, exactly like any creationist. He's shooting his mouth off about subjects he doesn't understand. He's dangerously wrong, and his rants on this will probably result in people's deaths. He's been at this for years, and he appears to be getting worse.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/10/the_2009_recipient_of_the_richard_dawkin_1.php
(I was irked by Orac's annoyance at the end of this, but it's pretty understandable when he's been talking about this for years and people have been ignoring it or defending Maher's arrogant ignorance and irresponsible posturing like it's just legitimate skepticism.)
Posted by: Orac
|
October 17, 2009 4:37 PM
Actually, I meant the "insect repellant in teh vaccines" gambit, but close enough. Oh, well.
Posted by: DoctorAtlantis | October 17, 2009 4:56 PM
I wonder if Maher has perhaps smoked some pot? I heard that can make you paranoid. And surely he has some paranoia.
Posted by: Andyo
|
October 17, 2009 4:57 PM
I think he's more like the conspiracy theorists he most hates, than ID'ers. ID'ers are willful liars and deceivers first, flawed logical thinkers second. I don't think Maher believes he's not telling the truth or being dishonest knowingly.
Posted by: Mike Brownstein | October 17, 2009 4:57 PM
Maher has openly admitted that he is into alternative medicine as well...and I'm not just speaking about the pot use
Posted by: Orac
|
October 17, 2009 4:59 PM
And I was annoyed at your being irked at my annoyance at the end of my post. :-)
In reality, maybe I should have restrained myself, but since when has restraint been part of Orac's blogging style? At least I admitted that I was probably being a bit petulant.
Posted by: brianjordan
|
October 17, 2009 5:17 PM
Peanut butter? Don't go there! It's so contaminated that it disproves evolution!
Posted by: Hinemoana | October 17, 2009 5:21 PM
I used to work in a GMP microbiology lab. You know, testing nutraceuticals and stuff for microbial contaminants. One time we opened up a packet of herbal sups and there were insects crawling around in the packet. ALL the herbal stuff is FULL of all sorts of microbes. Especially anything with ginkgo in it. I don’t know why. But we used to have to count the ginkgo sample results in a laminar flow hood so that we wouldn’t contaminate everything else with the mould that grew IN BETWEEN the incubated plates.
Posted by: woozy
|
October 17, 2009 5:25 PM
'tis better to doubt and become a whacko then to have never doubted at all.
Me:I wouldn't go so far as to call what he's doing similar to creationists' actions.
You:I would. That's exactly what Maher is doing. He's sowing doubt, cherrypicking information, relying on stuff that clearly comes from crank sites.
I would see him more as a victim of a creationist still believing in creationism and not yet convinced by the "other side".
A creationist (as opposed to someone who is just wrong on an issue) is unwilling to be convinced no matter what evidence and is content to embrace any lie if it supports his view. Perhaps (probably) I'm being lenient on him because he's "one of ours", but I don't see him in this camp. I see him more of a healthy skeptic sticking to his opinions and staying unswayed but at a desperate stage.
Someone else: What I mean is that the errors Bill slip into is rooted in his conviction of not wanting to be dependent on authority, and that dependency is a result of being vulnerable to deception
Which in my opinion is a healthy attitude to take. Well, not the way you've worded it, which makes it sounds like he's rejecting an authority simply because it is an authority. But I believe it's healthy to reject blind dependence on authority and to insist authorities, all authorities, be held up to scrutiny.
- as we see from him, this value can often just makes him more vulnerable to deception (eg, when he arbitrarily creates authorities to reject like "western medicine").
I believe this to be an eternal cost of skepticism. I'd rather some skeptics reject sanity and truth and fall to cranks, than have authorities never doubted.
I have no problem with questioning "western medicine". Baby formulas are *not* better than breast milk. Cleanliness and penile cancer ae not significant factors to favor circumcision. Natural childbirth really isn't that painfull or dangerous. etc. Of course, it's absurd to replace something one has doubts about with something utterly unverified and kooky. When one engages skepticism it must be tempered and checked. In this case, Mahr reached a wrong conclussion and is remaining unconvinced. *meh* it happens. In fact it has to happen.
"I reject religion because it "pushes people around" Same reason Mao rejected it, and because it was "poisonous". But I know what you mean. I'm only adding a footnote, not a challenge.
My point being, that I really don't care very much that I think religion is "incorrect", but am very concerned that people accept it blindly.
Posted by: Brock Lee | October 17, 2009 5:29 PM
Americans really love their peanut butter!
Posted by: placebo | October 17, 2009 5:31 PM
I share much of Maher's medical skepticism. Perform an internet search on "drug company scandals" and you should be skeptical too. Read about Merck and their drug Vioxx. Company officials and the FDA knew of its safety problems yet allowed it to go to market. Read about the $100,000 bribe offered to Rep. Nick Smith of Michigan by a drug company lobbyist pushing the Medicare drug bill. Read about drug companies suppressing harmful studies regarding their drugs. Read how AstraZeneca benefitted from the 2008 Nobel prize for medicine while having a board member on the selection committee. Read about professors that are being richly paid to put their names to ghostwritten articles endorsing new drugs.
The above is just a tiny sampling of the scandals that are becoming commonplace in the drug industry that is so powerful in America and the world today. Why wouldn't vaccines be subject to the same corruption?
Posted by: brianjordan
|
October 17, 2009 5:41 PM
@Brock Lee,
Given that peanut butter is so commenplace in the USA, do your children have less, as much, or more peanut allergy than has sprung up in the UK? Do we just have to keep eating it for another couple of generations and all will be well?
Posted by: Gregory Greenwood
|
October 17, 2009 5:43 PM
Michael @ 1 and Rev. BDC @ 4;
" Why is he freaking out about that? I bet he probably drinks alcohol, which is essentially poison.
Not only that but he smokes pot."
So he has his regular dose of neuro-toxin and carcenogens, and he is worried about vaccines? He probably lives or works in a city with less than stellar air-quality too. It is likely that from time to time he eats processed food.
Poor Maher is beset from all sides by threats an order of magnitude more grevious than any vaccine. If he is so worried about vaccination, one wonders how he functions at all.
Posted by: FlameDuck | October 17, 2009 5:45 PM
Well here's a possibly stupid question. Bill Maher is willing to take the CDC's word for "what's in it", but not their word for "it's perfectly safe"?
Also I love the bit about "perfect health, by whose standards"? Well by Western standards. Obviously. Only in western countries do people even care about health. In the rest of the world, most people are too worried about basic fucking survival, like getting clean drinking water or electricity, to worry too much about whether they smoke and drink too much, or exercise too little.
Posted by: woozy
|
October 17, 2009 5:49 PM
No. He's willfully ignorant and refusing to look honestly at the evidence, exactly like any creationist. He's shooting his mouth off about subjects he doesn't understand. He's dangerously wrong, and his rants on this will probably result in people's deaths.
Well, ... you might be right. As I said, I'm probably being lenient on him. I'm still (probably unjustifiably) giving him the benefit of the doubt that he isn't willfully ignorant. (Like you, I found willfull ingnorance one of the most dangerous things there is.)
But you're right about shooting off the mouth about subjects he doesn't understand. That's bad.
I don't think he's persuasive enough to result in any deaths. Although, yes, I see your point.
I still want to believe he is still wrong but open-minded yet unconvinced, but you are are persuading me that I might be wrong in this and he is willfully ignorant.
But I still maintain it's healthy to question all authorities (even correct ones) skeptically[1], but you might convince me this isn't what Mahr is doing. I also still maintain, this will always result in several skeptics reaching an incorrect conclussion (which is what I thought Mahr had done, but you might convince me wasn't the case) but that's an acceptable price.
Hmmm.... actually, you know what? You were right. I was wrong. My apologies.
====
[1] -- obviously "questioning an authority skeptically" doesn't mean casting it out just 'cause you don't like it, or cherry picking argument, or embracing lies....
Posted by: dustin | October 17, 2009 5:55 PM
I wonder if he's ever heard of the dose-toxicity curve.
Nah...
Posted by: SC, OM | October 17, 2009 5:56 PM
Well, I'm bothered by
Eh.
(Sheesh! I linked to your post and everything.
Ingrate. :))
I was just a bit surprised by what seemed to be dominant in your attitude. I'd think your sense of "I-told-you-so" and annoyance at people's past ignorance or failure to appreciate the seriousness of the problem, even if this may have contributed to it in some sense, would be far outweighed by your joy that the "johnny-come-latelys" are now aware and vocally expressing outrage.
And of course I'm entitled to criticize, since I've never had an arrogant or petulant moment in my life, as others here can no doubt attest.
Posted by: Travis | October 17, 2009 5:57 PM
Hinemoana, eww, I am glad I rarely take any medication but hearing that makes me glad I do not indulge in a daily dose of herbal supplements.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 17, 2009 6:00 PM
And of course I'm entitled to criticize, since I've never had an arrogant or petulant moment in my life, as others here can no doubt attest.
Uh....
Ok, back into the kitchen I go.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 17, 2009 6:02 PM
Can I interest you in one of these?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 17, 2009 6:04 PM
It isn't. He's not being skeptical he's being a denialist.
The science shows the efficacy and safety of vaccines. He's denying that evidence based on nothing but his own smug ego.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 17, 2009 6:07 PM
Oh and MAJeff, I want a canning lesson along with recipes.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 17, 2009 6:10 PM
Oh and MAJeff, I want a canning lesson along with recipes
You'll have to come up to North Dakota. Some of my colleagues and I recently had a canning lesson for other colleagues who'd never done it before. One of them contacted me to tell me the gewurztraminer-dill jelly I made was lovely on her fish dinner last night. Ima need to buy some clams or something to toss some of that jelly on.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 17, 2009 6:11 PM
Well that may be a while.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 17, 2009 6:12 PM
Well that may be a while.
That's a very, very common response.
Posted by: SC, OM | October 17, 2009 6:23 PM
No problem. Though you could have omitted the rest after arriving at this realization.
;)
and, y'know, vaccines. :/
From the "Testimonials":
:)
Posted by: Brock Lee | October 17, 2009 6:27 PM
Brian @37-
I don't know the answer to your questions, but there is an interesting website on food allergies.
"From 1997 to 2007, the prevalence of reported food allergy increase 18% among children under age 18. The prevalence of peanut allergies has doubled in the 5 years from 1997 to 2002 according to research reported in the December 2003 JACI, and researchers don’t really know why."
Posted by: Insightful Ape | October 17, 2009 6:38 PM
I am just sad.
I still like "Religulous". I like most of what Maher says about other things. It is so upsetting to see him, or our friend "placebo" here, simply going off the deep end and becoming every bit typical conspiracy nuts. And I have met other in freethought groups.
Is this why it is so hard to unite nonbelievers-because we are just too busy fighting it out among ourselves? Because apart from not liking traditional religion, there is practically nothing else that ties us together?
I hope not.
Posted by: woozy
|
October 17, 2009 6:40 PM
I share much of Maher's medical skepticism. Perform an internet search on "drug company scandals" and you should be skeptical too.
I agree about skepticism but part of skepticism is scrutinizing evidence.
The above is just a tiny sampling of the scandals that are becoming commonplace in the drug industry that is so powerful in America and the world today. Why wouldn't vaccines be subject to the same corruption?
I think the general answer answer is to evaluate the conclussions. Knowing that there is probably corruption in the vaccine development, is that enought to reasonably conclude the vaccines are useless? If it is, than what conclussion do you reach and what evidence do you use to support that.
To question a position, persue evidence and decide to reject it is skepticism.
To reject a position and embrace another without evidence or despite evidence is quackery.
To question a position, persue evidence and to ultimately accept it is also skepticism.
To accept a position without question is obedience.
I'd like to think that most on this forum know the difference.
Posted by: hobx
|
October 17, 2009 6:53 PM
My eyebrow started rising when he said something about "teaching the debate". Now where have we heard that argument before? Nothing amuses me more than Maher having a go at the religious, but in this case he's just as looney as that sordid lot. I'd have a lot more respect if he were to consider Shermer's letter. Now that would be a turn out for the books!
Posted by: woozy
|
October 17, 2009 7:01 PM
It isn't. He's not being skeptical he's being a denialist. The science shows the efficacy and safety of vaccines. He's denying that evidence based on nothing but his own smug ego.
Okie-dokie. I'll cede that. But I worry about blind obedience. A lot! I am, personally, utterly convinced of the efficacy of vaccines and I, personally, am satisfied with their safety, but in general am dubious at taking medical companies at their word (let's not forget thalidomide). I get irritated at wingnuts who go off on... well, whatever, these anti-dairy&wheat folks are driving me up the wall right now ... but I feel ... icky ... when folks have knee-jerk reactions to anyone who doubts anything.
Posted by: SEF
|
October 17, 2009 7:05 PM
The recent-ish suggestion I heard was that there seemed to be a correlation with the way peanut oil was now being used in lots of baby products; whereas, previously, UK children only encountered peanuts much later. I haven't heard where they got with that line of enquiry though.
Posted by: Vaughan | October 17, 2009 7:06 PM
PZ is wise about most things but an ignorant gullible fool about taking the shot.
I work in a hospital and will not be taking this dubious vaccine. Don't worry PZ , not in your continent.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 17, 2009 7:11 PM
Don't worry PZ , not in your continent.
I think most of us in North America can breathe a sigh of relief.
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | October 17, 2009 7:17 PM
ooh, but a Pharyngulite cooking lessons party would be Teh Awesome. you just know you want to! I know I do, since I'm dependent for my canning/pickling needs on the boyfriend and his family. I only just figured out how to make American pies! :-p
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 17, 2009 7:22 PM
Maybe I should start a YouTube series on canning/cooking. A way to start a new career as a media cook...
Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 17, 2009 7:24 PM
I only just figured out how to make American pies! :-p
We started singing...
Bye bye miss american pie
Drove my chevy to the levy
But the levy was dry
Two good ole boys drinking whiskey and rye
Singing this will be the day that I die
I am sorry. I could not help it!
Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 17, 2009 7:27 PM
Maybe I should start a YouTube series on canning/cooking. A way to start a new career as a media cook...
What would you call the show? And should we come up with suggestions?
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 17, 2009 7:27 PM
And if my company offers the swine flu shot (already have the regular flu shot paid by them), I will be one of the first to respond with an yes.NoR, professional scientist...
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | October 17, 2009 7:28 PM
I wholeheartedly encourage this idea. and I think all the other good cooks on Pharyngula should contribute, too.On another forum I used to frequent, they created a cook-book specifically of recipes by the posters. since the posters were from all over the world, the cook-book ended up very fascinating and exotic (especially the Indian recipes).
Posted by: CalGeorge | October 17, 2009 7:29 PM
Fox News is reporting that the swine flu vaccine isn't kosher.
More insanity!
"Pork byproduct in swine flu vaccine"
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/health/dpgo_101509_swine_vaccine_ingredients_4065304
Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 17, 2009 7:30 PM
Um, Nerd...you do realize that you just outed yourself as part of the conspiracy.
Why do you hate we gullible masses?
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 17, 2009 7:35 PM
OK, I'm giggling. Partially because I'm having my every-so-often "I chose the wrong fucking career" feelings and wishing I'd gone into a food-related career (I really do need to move into soc. and food related issues sooner rather than later). And the thought of me on camera? EEEEEEK! It would be a disaster if for no other reason than I'm constantly in motion and audiences/camera folk would get motion sickness trying to watch me. That, and I can't go longer than three minutes without saying "fuck" (Well, it worked for Ramsay...)
This convo should probably take place elsewhere, unless we can tie it to Maher's "Hospitals serve jell-o" comment. The bigger problem might be that hospitals contract out food service and have things like Starbucks (how much sugar do we really need in our drinks--I take my espresso black) and the like in their lobbies/food courts.....
Posted by: Brock Lee | October 17, 2009 7:36 PM
Maybe you could get advertisers.
Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 17, 2009 7:39 PM
That, and I can't go longer than three minutes without saying "fuck"
So that is why we cannot have you in polite society. It has nothing to do with being gay. What a relieve.
'fucking raspberry'
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 17, 2009 7:43 PM
I haven't received my check to keep quite. And I had to buy new windshield wipers for my 14 year old car out of my own pocket. You just can't rely on the man like you used to...Posted by: Janine, Vile Bitch, OM | October 17, 2009 7:46 PM
I haven't received my check to keep quite. And I had to buy new windshield wipers for my 14 year old car out of my own pocket. You just can't rely on the man like you used to...
It was so much better when we got our checks from Moscow. Now that it comes from Havana, most time it never comes. Alas, most of us in the conspiracy had to get jobs.
Posted by: Marc Abian | October 17, 2009 7:47 PM
Glucose?
I agree. I can just picture the massive crowds that flock to the see the books.
Posted by: Lynna
|
October 17, 2009 7:53 PM
As far as the Pharyngulite recipes go, perhaps I could contribute sauteed rattlesnake and prickly pear cactus.
Posted by: Lynna
|
October 17, 2009 7:55 PM
Three minutes is a long time.
Posted by: Steven Dunlap
|
October 17, 2009 7:55 PM
This and the previous thread inspired me to do some research. This is all giving me flashbacks to elementary school when (1960s) there was some scare about the incidents of polio resulting from the vaccines themselves.
From: A new challenge for former polio patients. FDA Consumer; Jun91, Vol. 25 Issue 5, p21, 5p, by Zamula, E.
In 1916 the first Polio epidemic in the U.S. 27,000 people were paralyzed, with 6,000 deaths.
"The 1952 polio epidemic was the worst in our nation's history. Nearly 58,000 cases were reported that year; 3,145 Americans died and 21,269 were left with mild to disabling paralysis. More children died of polio in 1952 than of any other infectious disease."
Polio had been endemic in the human population for likely thousands of years, but given poor sanitation most people contracted polio prior to age 3, when the disease is mostly harmless (like a moderate cold). Spreading by fecal matter, the custom of throwing the contents of a chamber pot out the window in cities or using badly constructed out-houses or latrines in the country resulted in near certainty that toddlers would catch polio at the time in their lives it would not harm them. Modern sanitation caused us to lose this mode of acquiring immunity. Given the transmission by saliva together with the implementation of compulsory public school education epidemics struck the U.S throughout the first half of the 20th century, mostly in the late summer or early autumn when children returned to school.
The incidence of polio during the first year of vaccination dropped to several hundred.
"On average, fewer than 10 cases of polio a year were reported from 1975 to 1990. Some of these cases have been associated with administration of the attenuated live virus vaccine, according to CDC. Others have been brought into the country by immigrants or visitors from abroad. The last U.S. polio epidemic occurred in 1979, when 10 Amish children, whose parents had refused to have them vaccinated on religious grounds, came down with the disease."
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
October 17, 2009 8:03 PM
Three minutes is a long time.
Tell me about it.
Posted by: Lynna
|
October 17, 2009 8:04 PM
Fox News is reporting every vaccine side effect they can drum up as well, including the near-death of a teenage girl. As usual with Fox reporting, you can't really tell what happened, nor even if the vaccine was the cause.
http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/health/Swine_Flu_Nearly_Kills_Keller
Posted by: Brian Jordan | October 17, 2009 8:10 PM
@Vaughan #58
What special knowledge have you about the vaccine? I worked in a hospital and had a semi-mandatory flu jab for many years. The only criticism I ever heard was that it made people more prone to getting colds!
People were quite sceptical about it and we were never sure whether it was to keep flu away from the patients or to keep us at work during an epidemic. Not many thought that it was for the good of *our* health.
I'll go with PZ - have you stopped to think what microscopic amounts of whatever is upsetting Maher are being injected?
Posted by: Lynna
|
October 17, 2009 8:16 PM
Orac pointed out that Maher was quoting ingredients from a conspiracy website, not from the CDC list.Posted by: Brian Jordan | October 17, 2009 8:21 PM
@Lynna #80
Even then, it's probably about the right amount to give people immunity to cockroaches. :-)
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 17, 2009 8:26 PM
That's the most likely out of the sixteen possible. Also known as dextrose. That is what I had in mind...Posted by: Simon | October 17, 2009 10:02 PM
Vaccines do work and generally are proven to work. Usually any risks they have seem far outweighed by the personal and social benefits.
Flu vaccines however, have generally not been demonstrated to work.
Data on them come from observational studies only with no randomized double blind testing. Flu vaccine advocates refuse to allow such testing.
In addition to this the raw numbers do not really make sense in terms of rates of flu death. Why does flu death rate not change when the vaccines miss their mutating targets (as happens). Why do flu death not change when we are short of vaccines some years (as happens).
Now Maher may be ranting and incoherent on the topic and hence unworthy of sensible consideration but a stopped clock is correct twice a day.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 17, 2009 10:05 PM
[Citation needed]
Posted by: SC, OM | October 17, 2009 10:24 PM
http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2009/07/transmission_pathogenicity_vir_1.php
Posted by: Sean3:16
|
October 17, 2009 10:33 PM
Maher could well heed this quote from William James:
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
Posted by: Simon | October 17, 2009 10:35 PM
Rorschach @ #84
Here is a nontechnical summary.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200911/brownlee-h1n1
Not a proper scientific citation but it is easy to find Jackson and Jefferson from the article.
Posted by: SC, OM | October 17, 2009 11:00 PM
Here is a
nontechnical summarymagazine article.Fixed.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | October 17, 2009 11:05 PM
I'll join you on the cooking side, I was the chef at a 4 star restaurant for 8 years, but the canning I want to learn.
Posted by: Stefan | October 17, 2009 11:48 PM
I think it comes down to his "diet". He constantly talks about how unhealthy Americans are because of their diets. He believes his diet is superior and responsible for his good health. He is a fanatic vegetarian and is on the board of directors for PETA. I think he believes that if everyone was a vegetarian they would be much healthier. That’s just what I gathered from watching him over the years.
Posted by: mrcreosote | October 18, 2009 12:10 AM
seems like bill maher's years of smoking dope has finally caught up with him
Posted by: Colin | October 18, 2009 12:15 AM
I've never been hit by a car and I'm 50, so can I stop looking both ways before I cross the street?
There's a large difference between (a) pointing out that it's hard to get vaccines out in a timely manner and a lot of flu shots may not be doing much and (b) the paranoid bullshit in Maher and several comments above. The nature of trying to deal with epidemics is you're always later than you want to be and you're often putting resources into preventing non-threats. It's logical error to conclude from that that vaccines are unnecessary or evil plots.
The other thing you see with Maher et al is a cult of bodily purity -- ZOMG they're injecting something into me. These people have no idea of what they're really eating and drinking and breathing, much less all the little creatures living on and in them. Pass the bug parts!
Posted by: Sauceress | October 18, 2009 12:19 AM
Vaughan #58
Your actual job discription would be?
Posted by: Vaughan | October 18, 2009 1:52 AM
Nurse (job description).
Posted by: strange gods before me, OM
|
October 18, 2009 2:02 AM
He is not a vegetarian.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 18, 2009 2:03 AM
Simon @ 87,
I note you cite a magazine article to support your ridiculous claim.
Trust me, I would be able to read through a technical summary, should you be able to provide one.
Until then, I might just call you full of shit.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 18, 2009 2:08 AM
SC,
excellent post you linked to @ 85, thanks.
Posted by: Aseem
|
October 18, 2009 3:23 AM
This might be slightly OT, but some comments on this and/or the previous Bill Maher thread say that he is an atheist. I think there is a tendency to believe he is an atheist because he worked in 'Religulous'. But his wikipedia page states him as being skeptical of organized religion, but a believer in a god nonetheless. I wish he applied his skepticism to anti-vax conspiracy theories as well.
Posted by: Rorschach | October 18, 2009 3:31 AM
@ 98,
I wish he applied any skepticism at all.
Reckon we have established by now that he considers himself an agnostic rather than an atheist.
Posted by: Snootch | October 18, 2009 3:36 AM
Remember, Bill Maher is first and foremost an entertainer with his primary concern being to gather the biggest audience possible. He does this by aligning his beliefs with the most people possible, while also deriving as much viewership from controversy. He has no reason to be scientifically correct about anything to maintain his income.
I appreciate his atheist-like approach because he is very vocal about the silliness and hypocrisy of religion. There are so few high-profile people with atheist-like views out there. I appreciate him for that.
Lastly, he has the luxury of dabbling in pseudo-scientific health nonsense because he is an elite Hollywood figure and doesn't use the same medical services as most of us. He has hordes of lackeys doing his work, can have specialized doctors brought to him as needed, he travels by limousine, and all his food is catered or specially prepared. Because of this isolation, I'm sure he rarely gets sick and remains healthy; good for him. If he was in a room full of fifth-graders every day or worked in a mall, I bet he would get the flu regularly and would think differently about vaccines and what it means to be a "sick American."
Posted by: TM | October 18, 2009 5:48 AM
Bill Maher is right, where did you get your facts?
Those aren't contaminates the are "Adjuvants" better said ingredients. PZ Myers your dead wrong, and you need to pull this blog. The adjuvants are used within vaccines to hold preserve defang and amplify the virus.
I'm with Bill and the 50%* of actual health care professionals and doctors and rather pass on main lining a live virus and Dow Chemical.
*http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/339/aug25_2/b3391
*http://usanewsthatmatters.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!9118791428895678!1271.entry
Posted by: 'Tis Himself
|
October 18, 2009 6:18 AM
"50% of actual health care professionals" includes chiropractors, holistic nutritionists, and acupuncturists. For that matter, Deprak Choptra [sic] is supposedly a "health care professional."
Posted by: FlameDuck | October 18, 2009 6:39 AM
Then you should be fired! http://failblog.org/2009/10/06/innoculation-fail/It's the equivalent of working with ESD sensitive devices and not wearing a ESD wriststrap, a porn actor not using a condom, or a soldier playing with handgrenades. It's irresponsible and putting others in danger. I hope you're not on my fucking continent either.
Well call me pedantic, but I'd take near death from a vaccine, over actual death from a killer virus, any day. However I can't stop thinking how wonderfully ironic it would be for all these evolution deniers and evangelical Christians, to die by the hands of an evolved super virus, all the while their prayers go unanswered. I wonder if they'd be just as smug if this was a especially lethal strain of an Ebolavirus instead?Posted by: Islander
|
October 18, 2009 6:42 AM
Will you just read PZ's link? Yes, formaldehyde and aluminum are adjuvants (aluminum assists the immune system in response to the vaccine and formaldehyde is used to protect against contamination during vaccine production). That's a good thing; they have been proven to be effective. But since your ilk bitches anyway, no adjuvants will be used in the U.S. vaccines [1].
Those 50% of health care workers are exclusively from Hong Kong, where the adjuvants will be used. Also, two of the main reasons for not wanting to get vaccinated were doubts about efficacy and a recent history of seasonal flu vaccinations, which have nothing to do with fear of the adjuvants. Further, more than half of those asked believed nurses should receive the first doses, so well more than half believe the vaccine should be administered.
[1] http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/vaccine_safety_qa.htm
From the link:
2009 H1N1 vaccines with adjuvants are being studied to determine if they are safe and effective. Experts will review these data when they are available. There is no plan at this time to recommend a 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine with an adjuvant.
PZ may have said "contaminants" instead of "adjuvants," but he's not the one who should have a post removed.
Posted by: Islander
|
October 18, 2009 6:50 AM
Whoops, that 2nd-to-last paragraph should have been in blockquotes also. BTW TM, I couldn't go to your second link, my job's firewall blocked it for being a "social networking and personal site." Don't accuse me of ignoring it.
Posted by: Matt Penfold
|
October 18, 2009 8:19 AM
I have always been some what puzzled by references to canning.
Do you really use cans, or is it what I, and other speakers of British English, would call bottling in that you use sterlised glass jars ?
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 18, 2009 8:27 AM
That's what it is. For some reason it is called canning in this country.Posted by: Carlie
|
October 18, 2009 8:30 AM
Ooo, book plug. Pickled, Potted, and Canned by Sue Shepherd is a fascinating look at food preservation through time. It also goes into depth about canning in glass v. aluminum, and why Europe tends to have more bottled products and the US has more canned (or tinned, as it were).
Posted by: Matt Penfold
|
October 18, 2009 8:37 AM
I am not big into bottling things, but I do make jam, marmalade and chutneys. I do a rather nice red onion marmalade that goes very well with a strong cheddar.
Posted by: Epinephrine
|
October 18, 2009 8:50 AM
Vaughan #58
So? You simply demonstrate that it's possible to be ignorant in a field in which you should be knowledgeable. It's rather like of biologists who don't believe in evolution - curiosities, but somewhat pitiful.
I like the solution offered by the Arkansas hospital, here; it would allow you to follow your hideously irresponsible plan to not be vaccinated, while offering some small protection to your patients in the form of a mask, and a much larger form of protection in their ability to say, "keep that moron away from me."
Posted by: Carlie
|
October 18, 2009 9:02 AM
I work in a hospital and will not be taking this dubious vaccine.
Hopefully you mentioned that you work in a hospital just to show how much you're willing to subject sick people to your germs, and not to try and claim any special knowledge privilege wrt the flu vaccine. "Work in a hospital" has absolutely no knowledge claims to it. Do you answer the phones at the switchboard? Make up the plates in the cafeteria? Saying you work in a hospital doesn't give you any lofty position of health superiority.
Posted by: Master Bates | October 18, 2009 11:22 AM
It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.
I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 18, 2009 11:27 AM
So MB #112, viri are communists? This is the first I heard of it. I thought they were apolitical.
Posted by: MikeG | October 18, 2009 11:43 AM
NoR, haven't you watched any movies with the evil mad scientist and the "virus to destroy them all (bwa-ha-ha)"? What color are the virus solutions? RED! Every time! Coincidence? I think not!
Posted by: SC, OM | October 18, 2009 11:52 AM
Simon,
Orac just posted this link on the other thread, which he says Crislip wrote in response to the Atlantic piece:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=2040
The conclusion:
Read it and the post by revere I linked to above (and others by him, if you have time).
*Leave aside that there's no "is" in that question. :)
Posted by: Monado | October 18, 2009 1:01 PM
Hell, read the allowed contaminants in canned soup, for God's sake! Insect parts, not more than 4 per cc or something. Yuck! Yet people go on eating it without keeling over.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
October 18, 2009 1:09 PM
Unless all the food is grown in hydroponic hermetically sealed greenhouses, there is no way to prevent soil, bacteria, insect parts, and animal parts from tagging along. All they can do along the food processing chain is try to minimize such debris.Posted by: Irene Solnik | October 18, 2009 1:45 PM
#3 is right on the money. So many pseudo-scientists think they are infallible. Maher also thinks he is a historian of the ancient middle east. NOT
Posted by: kantalope
|
October 18, 2009 1:57 PM
Speaking of loving peanut butter: Arachibutyrophilia and in opposition: Arachibutyrophobia
who knew?
Posted by: Brock Lee | October 18, 2009 2:14 PM
I'm glad there is help for those with fear of experiencing peanut butter sticking to the roof of their mouth. I learned about a new phobia today!
Posted by: micheleinmichigan | October 19, 2009 5:12 AM
Maher is a perfectly rational person. He is just stirring the pot to make ratings.
He makes a big stink about vaccines. He get lots of press, He gets more sponsers, He can bargain for a better contract and sell more books/dvds.
This is the same guy who said that a 40 year old female school teacher couldn't rape a 14 year old student because ALL 14 year old boys want to have sex.
Please.