Some of you might have been wondering just WTF has been going on here on the old blog, given the relative paucity of posts over the last week and the "reruns" from the distant past that I've been posting. I address this question because I realize that not everyone reads the comments and it's quite possible some of you might have missed it, but here in Michigan we had an enormous windstorm last Wednesday that knocked out power to 800,000+ people. Unfortunately, Orac was one of them. True, we did get the power back over the weekend, but then, in a cruel twist of fate, we lot power again on Tuesday, which is why there was no post yesterday. Even better, the power came back Wednesday morning as I was getting ready to head to Seattle to attend the yearly Society of Surgical Oncology meeting, only to die after about an hour. So that's three—count 'em—three times we've lost power in the last week, during a time period when we've had the coldest weather in March I can remember in a long time. I tell ya, I just can't win this week.
Now that that's out of the way, I can't help but make the observation that stuff happened while I was (mostly) offline. One thing that caught my eye is that Steve Novella discovered the wonder of delusion that is Kent Heckenlively. You remember Kent, don't you? I first encountered him when he was a member of the merry band of pseudoscience-worshiping antivaccine warriors over at the antivaccine crank blog Age of Autism. What attracted my attention was how what he did to his daughter to try to "cure" her of her autism opened my eyes wider to the lengths to which antivaccine parents will go and how far into quackery they will delve in order to "save" their child. In Heckenlively's case, he hit is daughter's grandparents up for $15,000 to take her to a dubious stem cell clinic in Costa Rica for "stem cell" injections directly into her cerebrospinal fluid. Not surprisingly, it didn't work.
Let's just put it this way. Heckenlively is so far off the ranch that even that apparently even that wretched hive of antivaccine scum and quackery that is AoA is insufficiently conspiratorial. I can only conclude that because I don't recall the last time I saw him post anything at AoA and, more importantly, he how appears to have found a home with Patrick "Tim" Bolen, a.k.a. Hulda Clark's pit bull, at least back when Hulda Clark was still alive. Clark, if you remember, proclaimed that all cancer and AIDS were caused by a liver fluke and could be cured using her "zapper," which always reminded me of a Scientology E-meter. In any case, I looked it up, and Heckenlively hasn't appeared in AoA since last July, while since June he's been tearing up The Bolen Report. This is not a step up. When next we see Heckenlively switch jobs, I fear we'll see him heading to the next logical place, Mike Adams' Natural News. Really, it's where he belongs. But I digress.
In any case, Steve used a post by Heckenlively published earlier this week entitled A Vaccine-Free World?… to note that the antivaccine narrative just gets darker. And he's right (as usual). The antivaccine narrative has been steadily getting darker and darker in the 12 years that I've been actively paying attention and writing about it. However, seeing Steve's post, I couldn't help but channel Leonard Cohen's last album before he died, which was entitled You Want It Darker. Remember, this is an album made by a man who knew he was going to die soon.
Yes, antivaccine activists do want it darker. Also remember that in any story (and that's what conspiracy theories are, in essence) there is a victim, a hero, and a villain. Guess who plays these roles in Heckenlively's fantasies? You'll see in a moment. In the meantime, join him on his magical mystery tour of his dark fantasy:
Remove all vaccines from usage for a period of five years, study them in laboratories and in animal models, then create a system to slowly introduce one vaccine at a time and monitor for long-term effects before even thinking of introducing a second vaccine. Oh, and while that’s being done, immediately REPEAL AND DON’T REPLACE the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act which currently gives pharmaceutical companies COMPLETE IMMUNITY FOR HARM DONE BY THEIR PRODUCTS.
Steve didn't really dwell much on this part of Heckenlively's screed, but I want to. What it demonstrates is just how fully deluded he is. He has utterly and literally no clue just how massively unethical such a plan would be. The reasons are numerous and range from the incredibly simple to grasp to more complicated. Basically, it is unethical to perform an experiment in which children are intentionally left unprotected from common dieseases that can be prevented by vaccines. Worse, Heckenlively's plan would take not just years, but likely decades, during which diseases like measles, mumps, diptheria, and pertussis would predictably come roaring back. After all, that's what happened in the UK when Andrew Wakefield's campaign to discredit the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine, aided and abetted by the complicit tabloid press, resulted in plunging vaccine rates. Measles, once eliminated, came roaring back. The same thing happened in Europe. Thus far in the US we've managed to avoid a resurgence as enormous, but there are worrisome signs that that could change, such as the Disneyland measles outbreak and declining vaccine uptake due to increasing numbers of personal belief exemptions to school vaccine mandates in Texas. Add to that other outbreaks, such as in my very own state, and it's hard not to conclude that herd immunity is hanging by a thread in too many places where critical masses of the vaccine-averse and antivaccine reside. There are, of course, many other problems besides ethics with Heckenlively's idea, not the least of which is how utterly expensive and impractical it would be.
Of course, such an experiment might—I repeat, might—be justified if there were massive and overwhelming evidence that the current vaccine schedule was causing horrible harm to huge numbers of children. The evidence, however, would have to be so obvious and irrefutable that not even Paul Offit or I could deny it. Even then, under such a circumstance, we would still want to figure out a strategy to determine what is causing harm that wouldn't inevitably result in wholesale outbreaks of infectious disease. Of course, if you're Kent Heckenlively, you believe the situation is just that apocalyptic and the evidence that irrefutable. That's where he and much of the antivaccine movement diverge with reality. They express sentiments like this:
We know that vaccines are causing MASSIVE DAMAGE to the health of our young and contributing to the massive epidemics of chronic diseases among those of working age and the dementias of the elderly. Don’t believe me? Just read the vaccine safety inserts. I hear Alex Jones and InfoWars are going to be doing their own series of special reports on THE VACCINE SIDE EFFECTS LISTED ON THE INSERTS. (That’s just the things the pharmaceutical companies admit!) I’m looking forward to that. Worried that it’s “Fake News?” That’s easy to remedy. If you have any questions, just go to your local pharmacy and ask for the inserts yourself.
Ah, yes, the appeal to the package insert. We should figure out a name for this logical fallacy, if someone hasn't already. Oh, yes, the ancient reptilian Skeptical Raptor already has, argumentum ad package insert. Oh, wait, that was me. (We'll just have to share the credit.) In any case, as Steve, and the Raptor (and I) have pointed out, package inserts are legal documents, not scientific documents. They are designed to cover the asses of the pharmaceutical companies, not to dispassionately list adverse events definitely linked to the vaccine or drug. Pretty much every bad thing that happened to any participant in the clinical trials leading to the licensing of a vaccine or drug is listed, whether that bad thing had anything to do with the vaccine or drug or not. Heckenlively, who loudly proclaims his JD (even though he doesn't practice law), should know that, but instead he says things like " In the legal system, such admissions are considered “clues.” Um, no. such "admissions" are there for one purpose and one purpose only, to protect the pharmaceutical company.
Of course, in Heckenlively's world, the nonexistent horror he describes is not due to negligence. Well, that's not entirely true. There is negligence there, or at least there was to begin with. However, after that, the reason this "suffering" continues is because "They" want it to. Remember what I said about every story needing a victim, a hero, and a villain? Well, the victims in Heckenlively's world are the children. Clearly, the villain is...well, it's not always clear exactly who is the villain, but it is always some combination of pharmaceutical companies, the government (usually the CDC, but often the FDA as well), state medical authorities, politicians who support school vaccine mandates (because, in Heckenlively's view, they are in the pockets of big pharma, natch), and the medical profession, all of whom deny based on science his evidence- and science-free beliefs that vaccines are horrifically harmful. Guess whom, that leaves as the hero? You guessed it:
But I thought when people like me raised our voices and claimed vaccines were harming the human species, that somebody in a position of authority in government or science would do some proper investigation. However, as I researched my book, INOCULATED: How Science Lost its Soul I had to confront some dark truths about the corruption of the American body politic. No matter how cynical I was about whether people in our government cared about children with autism, and the wholesale destruction of our species by vaccines, I wasn’t cynical enough. We tried to work with our health authorities. They turned a deaf ear.
So the battle lines are drawn. I did, however, forget one other villain, namely the press. After all, the press has increasingly (and correctly) treating antivaccine activists like Heckenlively as the fringe loons they are. So they must be paid off. I just saw a particularly telling article on that score, although it was not by Heckenlively. Rather, it was by Anne Dachel, published over at AoA, and entitled, Dachel Wake Up: Julia Belluz Is CDC's Company Gal!, which basically accuses an excellent journalist who's done some great stories on health and medicine as being in the pockets of pharma, along with the CDC. Because in Heckenlively's world, no one could ever be pro-vaccine unless it was because he or she was in the pocket of big pharma.
One key aspect of these dark conspiracy theories is the "hidden knowledge" narrative. Yes, the CDC, FDA, big pharma, and medical-industrial complex might have bamboozled the sheeple, but there are people who know, man. They've WOKEN UP (to borrow Heckenlively's all-caps):
I don’t care how much the mainstream media, funded by the waning pharmaceutical dollars continues to whip up hysteria, it won’t work. We all see the casualties in our schools, in our homes, and on our streets. A brutal reckoning is coming for those who have allowed this harm to children to take place.
Now do you see where all the comparisons with Nazis, the Holocaust, and death camps come from? People like Heckenlively truly believe that vaccines are so evil and those who promote them even more so. But Heckenlively imagines himself to be so much better than that. Elsewhere he as written about I’m Not Asking You to Smoke Crystal Meth . . . I Just Want You to Watch a Documentary." (Having seen the movie, I'll take the crystal meth, please. It couldn't be any worse.) The movie to which he is referring, of course, is VAXXED, Andrew Wakefield's antivaccine propaganda film disguised as a documentary. Hilariously, his friends were...less than receptive.
I have been astounded by the response of some long-time friends who when I say, “Hey, there’s this documentary about a whistle-blower at the CDC and the cover-up of the link between vaccines and autism, do you want to come and see it?” They act like I’m denying the existence of God. No, scratch that. If I asked them to come to a movie about an atheist, I’d get a better response. In very poignant emails back to me they have said that they will not even put at risk their “fugitive and cloistered virtue” (to steal from the poet, John Milton) by exposing themselves to the possibility that the government is lying to them.
Or maybe they recognize a ridiculous conspiracy theory when they see one. Kent has some smart friends. I wonder why they're friends with Ken, given that he must harangue them frequently about his antivaccine beliefs. Of course, the most important part of the conspiracy theory is hope and how it allows people like Heckenlively to view themselves as heroic crusaders against evil. For example, I've cited how Heckenlively shares one characteristic with me. (Embarrassing, but true.) He really, really loves J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, so much so that he actually wrote this back when he was still a regular at AoA:
When I watch I imagine myself as Aragorn, taking the Dimholt Road under the mountain, clutching the sword, Anduril, Flame of the West, offering a deal to the souls of the dishonored dead if they would join me in battle. I picture myself as Aragon, astride my horse in front of the Black Gate, telling my troops, I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of wolves and shattered shields, when the age of men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight! Then I jump off my horse, and with the setting sun behind me, a reckless, almost manic glint in my eye and a crooked grin, I am first to charge into the enemy army.
This is, of course, one of my favorite scenes from both The Lord of the Rings books and the movies. In it, the last heir of Isildur, Aragorn, had brought his forces to the Black Gate of Mordor to challenge the Dark Lord Sauron to battle, not with any hope of victory, but as a diversion to distract the Eye of Sauron long enough to allow the hobbits Frodo and Sam to cross Mordor and reach Mount Doom, there to destroy the One Ring, the source of Sauron’s evil power, by throwing it into the molten lava in the Crack of Doom. Aragorn, Gandalf, and his companions fully expected to die in the effort, and it looked as though they would do just that after hordes of orcs issued forth from the Black Gate and the battle was joined. They were saved because Sam and Frodo did reach Mount Doom and the ring was destroyed, thus destroying Sauron’s power and causing his armies to flee, before the hordes of Sauron’s orc’s could destroy Aragorn and his vastly outnumbered force. The point, of course, is that Heckenlively views himself (or fantasizes himself) as a heroic figure from the world of epic fantasy like Aragorn. Walter Mitty-like, Heckenlively fantasizes that it’s him leading a doomed mission to the very Black Gate of Mordor, knowing he’s unlikely to come out of it alive, in order to give others the chance to defeat the great evil against which he strives.
And, have no doubt, victory is the only outcome that Heckenlively envisions:
Here’s how the Vaccine-Autism war ends. We win. They lose. The memory of what they have done will cling to their children for generations to come, like the children of Nazi war criminals who were horrified by the crimes of their parents. And what about us? We were the resistance. We were the freedom-fighters. We fought to protect the future. And we will tell our stories.
He even fantasizes about pro-vaccine activists as French nobility dragged to the guillotine to have their heads lopped off during the French Revolution and hopes for some "reasonable" (i.e., compliant") provaccine advocates, whom he contrasts to the French aristocracy before the Revolution:
The white majority in South Africa knew they were losing to Nelson Mandela’s call for justice and they took actions which averted a catastrophe. Even though the British ended up fighting a war with us, there were voices in England who thought that the whole affair was utter madness. Eventually, their views prevailed. Hell, even some Nazis could see where Hitler was leading them after D-Day and tried to change things by blowing him up.
He's even offered pro-vaxxers a way out in a post entitled, I Will Accept Your Surrender:
I've made this offer several times in the past. I'm making it again. I am willing to accept the surrender of those who have perverted science, harmed a generation of children, and even as of this late date are willing to harm more children so as to not to upset the balance of their lives. It must be truly troubling for those who continue to fuel the epidemic of autism and other chronic diseases that even though you still maintain the trust of those in the media, the scientific community, and most of the people in politics, an amazing 39% of the population in a recent Fox News poll believe parents need to have the right to decide how and whether their children can be vaccinated. You see, I've interviewed enough scientists that I understand the world in which you operate. Although you tremble in fear when you confront the dark questions at the heart of why so many children and adults suffer with chronic diseases, you feel quite comfortable making others cower as has been done to you. It must really annoy you when you fulminate against us as if we were some extremist group, that somehow you can't get the rest of the population to fully buy it.
I politely decline to surrender. Writing about this, I realize that perhaps Steve dwelt a bit too much on the darkness in the antivaccine conspiracy theory. Yes, I've referred to the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement as the idea that, somewhere in the CDC, big pharma, and the medical profession, "They" know that vaccines cause autism and all sorts of harm to children. That's why the whole "CDC whistleblower" conspiracy theory was so powerful. It tapped deep into the fantasies of antivaxers; he claims that data potentially showing a link between vaccines and autism were covered up by the CDC. However, darkness alone isn't enough. Who would continue to believe in a conspiracy theory where there is nothing but darkness and overwhelming forces arrayed against you that you have no hope of ever defeating? No, it's the hope of ultimate vindication, of victory, that sustains the antivaccine conspiracy narrative. It's the fantasy of fighting a heroic battle against all odds. It's the fantasy of one day actually winning that epic battle. It's the fantasy of being able to administer their version of "justice" to their enemies, in which evildoers admit their evil can atone and join the resistance and those who are defeated are punished for their "crimes" after the resistance wins. This is both a light and dark vision. It's a vision of light in that (to antivaxers), it's justice. Those responsible for the "crimes" imagined by antivaxers will be forced to admit their crimes and pay for them. It's a dark vision in that this "justice" not infrequently involves retribution. It's not for nothing that Heckenlively perseverates over Nazis and chose the Reign of Terror after the French Revolution as an example of retribution.
It's a very powerful narrative that taps deep into something buried at the heart of human nature. It's also pretty much immune to reason. It's a conspiracy theory that's potent even in "normal" times. However, we are not living in normal times. Donald Trump, who has a long and sordid history of antivaccine statements, is the President, and that gives people like Heckenlively even more hope that they are winning:
Let’s talk about what’s really causing the Vaxxers to lose their f******* minds. Donald Trump won the American election. He doesn’t trust the pharmaceutical companies and he is going to put into positions of power those people who don’t trust them, either. The free ride is over. Hell, he even nominated Robert Kennedy, Jr., member of a legendary Democratic dynasty and well-known environmental lawyer, to head a Commission on Vaccine Safety and Scientific Integrity.
I guess Trump's distrust of the pharmaceutical industry is why he promised to loosen FDA regulations and then appointed an honest-to-goodness pharma shill as the FDA Commissioner, causing pharma to breathe a sigh of relief and proclaim, "Thank God it's Gottlieb!" (Antivaxers were never too strong on consistency.) Also, it's not at all clear that RFK, Jr. was appointed to anything; all we have is his word for it, and you know what that's worth. (Not much.)
I fear what will happen when antivaxers like Heckenlively finally realize that Trump is very likely not going to do what they want him to, other than perhaps around the edges. It could be scary. After all, another part of many conspiracy narratives is betrayal by someone viewed as an ally.
- Log in to post comments
And to think the whole Anti-Vax movement in America started with reporter named Lea Thompson who won a Pullitzer for a scaremongering story claiming that Whooping Cough Vaccine caused brain damage.
Hell, he even nominated Robert Kennedy, Jr., member of a legendary Democratic dynasty and well-known environmental lawyer, to head a Commission on Vaccine Safety and Scientific Integrity.
I kind of suspect that if a president acts in his executive role to ordain a Presidential Commission, he or she doesn't nominate potential chairs; it's more of a 'decree'. But anyway, it would be a formal action, isn't it? You would think there would be some public record of it.
Remove all vaccines from usage for a period of five years
An absolute ban? For someone whose fantasies are all about fighting for Freedom, Heckenlively sounds surprisingly predictably eager to have everyone else subjected to his will. Not just in the US but globally.
I have had itwith these motherfeckin fascists.
To me, that conjured up an image of a warship shot to pieces and sinking, with the Captain confidently proclaiming from the bridge "I am willing to accept your surrender", while the enemy warship (without any damage) looms over it.
It's quite simple - the antivaxxer's crusade is tantamount to child abuse. Another perversity that Trump can add to his CV.
I have referred this article to an ongoing discussion in "The Conversation (AUS)" of an article *Banning unvaccinated kids from child care may have unforeseen consequences* written by Prof C Raina MacIntyre (Professor of Infectious Diseases Epidemiology, Head of the School of Public Health and Community Medicine, UNSW).
https://theconversation.com/banning-unvaccinated-kids-from-child-care-m…
Kent also subjected (maybe still is) his daughter to bleach enemas. His level of delusion and self-aggrandisement is at the fringe of the anti-vaxx movement thankfully. At least his readership at Bolen's rag is nowhere near what it was at AoA. Wonder what happened to cause his demotion.
@Julian: It would be appropriate to think of Heckenlively as the Black Knight. "'Tis but a flesh wound."
"...those who have perverted science, harmed a generation of children, and even as of this late date are willing to harm more children so as to not to upset the balance of their lives."
Sounds a lot like the anti-vax crowd to me.
The consequences of flag-wavers-of-ignorance like Heckenlively can be seen here where a non-vaccinating Minnesota parent says it's part of the plan if your child dies from a vaccine-preventable disease. She says she's going to home school her child rather than meed the Minnesota requirements for her unvaccinated child to attend school. Since many states in the US don't have the ability to track vaccination rates in the increasing numbers of home-schooled children (many of whom are unvaccinated), I worry that herd immunity is more compromised than we think.
Sorry, but I won't even consider surrendering unless there's a lot of money in it. Pay me off and I'll spill so many details, Thompson will look like a piker.
I visualize riding my coal-black horse into the massive lobby of the First International Bank of The Conspiracy, depositing massive amounts of filthy lucre into its dark shadowy vaults.
And then it's off to Jason's for a Deli Cowboy sandwich (they're really good).
His original fantasy also shows some misunderstanding of the vaccine licensing process. There's a lot of lab work and animal studies that go into getting the IND license that allows companies to start testing vaccines in humans. In other words, for the newer vaccines, what he is fantasizing was already done.
I'd also add, Orac, that the vindication they have in mind is also dark. It's all about revenge.
Kent Heckenlively appeared narcissistic and your narrative was hypnotic until you wrote,
"The evidence, however, would have to be so obvious and irrefutable that not even Paul Offit or I could deny it."
MJD says,
There lays the problem, this proposed committee of two has shown to be unreliable on a very important vaccine safety issue.
Specifically, the evidence is obvious and irrefutable that a hazardous material (i.e., a natural occurring polyisoprene) used in vaccine packaging can contaminate vaccine solutions with allergenic proteins and cause an adverse immune response.
Paul Offit and Orac (aka, Offrac) have not publicly renounced its continued used and thereafter have violated the public trust in vaccines.
If Gandalf the White were present he would intervene and pronounce with effect, "Offrac you staffs are broken!".
Orac also pointed out that Dr. Gottlieb emphatically rejects the vaccine-autism nonsense and likely almost everything that Heckenlively and his fellow loons have ever posted at AoA.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/04/case-closed-on-vaccine-autism-debate-doc…
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2016/12/14/schadenfreude-at-the-fda-i…
Vaccine indoctrination depends on propaganda, and high IQ dupes to perpetuate it who've never questioned their own indoctrination.
On the pro-vax side, there are scientists developing more vaccines, medical workers spreading them around the world; and social engineers developing more and better ways to get people to take them. They really believe they're the best of the brightest, helping to save the world.
On the anti-vax side, you have advocates for "safer" vaccines, and those who believe the only concern is autism, or mercury. They also believe their own indoctrination--they just think there's room for improvement.
And then you have a few people in key positions on all sides who know fully well what vaccine indoctrination is all about: keeping the population sick, weak and obedient. They're elitist psychopaths who genuflect to the likes of Edward Bernays, and they are deliberately spreading disinformation and misdirection, both pro-vax and anti-vax. The best way to control the opposition is to lead it, and staging faux battles with faux nemeses is all part of the show.
Hickenlively has a remarkable gift for alliteration.
I can understand why the narrative tends to get darker. In a position where people are turning away from you because they decide you're too crazy to associate with, life would always have the appearance of battle lines being drawn. Isolation has a way of creating desperation.
@NWO Reporter: I'd have more respect for you if you were consistently anti-vax. Say what you will about the tenets of the anti-vax crowd, at least it's an ethos.
But no, you have to come in spouting this "both sides" nonsense. That presumes a frame in which both sides are considered, if not equal, then at least comparable. Which couldn't be further from the truth. One side has respect for facts and well-designed clinical trials. The other thrives on anecdotes and conspiracy theories. One of these things is not like the other.
"Both sides" journalism is one of the things that contributed to Trump's election. Fake controversies about e-mails and what happened in Benghazi were elevated to the equivalent of openly bragging about sexual assault and stiffing contractors.
To quote the gospel according to St. Neil Peart, "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." As someone who claims to be a reporter, you should be on the side of truth, and there are times when you have to choose a side in order to be on the side of truth. Vaccination is one of those issues. Claiming that the anti-vax crowd's arguments have nearly equal merit (or lack thereof) to the people who recommend vaccines gives the anti-vax crowd credibility they have not earned.
BTW - Trump hasn't nominated RFK Jr. for anything related to vaccine safety.
Statement released by Hope Hicks, White House Director of Strategic Communications:
"The President-elect enjoyed his discussion with Robert Kennedy Jr. on a range of issues and appreciates his thoughts and ideas. The President-elect is exploring the possibility of forming a commission on Autism, which affects so many families; however no decisions have been made at this time. The President-elect looks forward to continuing the discussion about all aspects of Autism with many groups and individuals,"
Once again, we have unsubstantiated claims of a global conspiracy....one which, I guess, had lasted for decades or more, without any exposure whatsoever.
I don't quite know how these types of people can even tie their shoes, with the thought that every government in the world is out to get them.
@Eric Lund -- I think you should read my comment again:
"And then you have a few people in key positions on all sides who know fully well what vaccine indoctrination is all about: keeping the population sick, weak and obedient."
I don't think it's possible to get any clearer than that, as far as my position on vaccines. I'm not playing both sides -- I'm calling out both sides, to the extent they are both serving the vaccine indoctrination agenda, wittingly or unwittingly.
@MJD
Oh really? Would you please post links to the studies that show this to be the case, Michael.
Of course, the faux paragon of reason "calling out both sides". Nothing new here; you're just as anti-vaxx and anti-science as the loon this post is the subject of.
Let's face it, Science Mom: there's nothing you wouldn't get behind fully, as long as the right people tell you it's "science." :D
That's of course where else you are dead wrong. I can evaluate the literature for myself as can most here. This is in stark contrast with the likes of you, who suffer from Dunning-Kruger or are just contrarian in order to appear avant-garde.
Really? Do have any examples where you think the "official position" on any issue of science is wrong?
NWO whatever is just a common troll. Even the idiot use of "NWO" is indicative of a conspiracy troll. I got tired of hearing about that conspiracy from a crazy aunt over forty years ago.
So, NWO, enlighten us. When did this conspiracy start? Who coordinates the global message?
By what mechanism are payments made? What mechanisms exist to "silence" those who find out the truth?
Seriously, explain it, "scientifically" since you seem to be in the know....
And go away Travis - for someone who complains about "doxing" you're continued presence here certainly isn't helping your case.
I'd have more respect for the NWO Global Elites if they'd quit dithering on the Great Culling. There are way too many Useless Bandwidth Eaters.
Those Global Elites, they do have a very strange way of culling the population....I mean, we have the highest standards of living, with the longest lifespans in human history...not to mention that the current population growth rate continues to increase.
They are certainly doing a horrible, horrible job.
Yes, mammograms. Although that has been largely corrected in the U.S.
So you "disagree" with an official position on science that has "been largely corrected." LOL. I hope that is an example of your sense of humor. :D
I think the tin-foil beanie brigade's "official position" has shifted from that to just keeping people chronically-ill so as to be life-long consumers of pharmaceutical products.
By your own admission, you are claiming that both sides are comparably bad in this regard, which is exactly what I am complaining about. It's called false equivalence. To paraphrase Stephen Colbert, facts have a well-known pro-vaccine bias.
Here you're getting into "not even wrong" territory. I am a practicing scientist who has been involved in some actual scientific controversies. Science doesn't take an "official" position. Rather, policy makers use (or should use) the best available science to make official policy. Scientists will form a consensus on a topic when the evidence is overwhelming. That is the case here: the benefits of preventing needless death and suffering due to vaccine-preventable diseases is almost universally considered to outweigh the costs of providing vaccines to all who can and should be vaccinated. Similarly with global warming: well-established physics and chemistry shows that carbon dioxide absorbs infrared radiation in the wavelength range at which a black body with Earth's temperature radiates, and burning fossil fuels will increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, so the temperature of the Earth must increase enough that the amount of radiation leaving the Earth balances the amount coming in from the Sun. But in situations where the evidence is not conclusive one way or the other, scientists will disagree on the subject. That's why we have clinical trials and other experiments.
What you're describing is the way science is *supposed* to work.
"Scientists will form a consensus on a topic when the evidence is overwhelming." Well, yes--but much of the so-called "scientific consensus" we are dealing with now is actually manufactured perception, not genuine consensus. Meaning that scientists venturing outside the preferred paradigm will have difficulty being funded, published, and publicized in the media, and will often find their careers on the receiving end of smear campaigns. Vaccines and other medical issues, man-made climate change, GMOs, fluoride, and other environmental issues--all are being controlled with a manufactured perception of scientific consensus.
Just to add...there are many examples in history where great minds who opposed the so-called "scientific consensus" of the day were the agents of great change and enlightenment.
Real science is not now, and never had been, about "consensus."
I called your bluff and you shift the goal-post. Why am I not shocked. I think you don't realise the big world we live in. Policy in the U.S. has responded to the evidence that had emerged, that's how biomedical science works.
Try looking through Orac's archives sometime. You will find several examples in which he dissects actual papers published in allegedly peer reviewed journals. Papers which go against what you call the preferred paradigm. Some of these are even published in journals famous enough for people outside of biomedical science to have heard of them, e.g., A. J. Wakefield et al. in the Lancet in 1998. He dissects those papers in the way a typical graduate student journal club would, pointing out the reasons (of which there are inevitably many) why the papers don't actually show what they purport to show. These scientists have no problem getting publicity for their work, since controversy sells newspapers and their TV and web equivalents. And yes, many of these individuals manage to be quite well-funded. NIH is not the only US funding source for biomedical research--there are private foundations and industry funding as well.
It's not that science doesn't have problems. But the problems it has are not the kind you postulate.
You can never rely on someone else's analysis of another person's work, because unfortunately, they often have their own agendas for disparaging it, and will simply not be honest or objective.
In general, the more someone is trying to convince you not to pay attention to someone's work, the more important it is to pay attention to it.
It's fine to read other people's analysis of the work afterward--but it's not a substitute. You will quickly understand why if you do what I described above.
Eric Lund: "Try looking through Orac’s archives sometime."
Apparently that is a task that is much too difficult for the NWO troll to manage. The handy dandy little search box at the top of this page when he kept bringing up old stale arguments, some that were dismantled by the clear box with blinking lights over a decade ago.
And none of them were or ever will be of the anti-vaxx sort so what's your point?
Just to add…there are many examples in history where great minds who opposed the so-called “scientific consensus” of the day were the agents of great change and enlightenment.
Prime example: Edward Jenner.
The cow pus guy? LOL. :D Besides, he hardly invented the inoculation idea.
NWO @34: If you're so unhappy with "Vaccines and other medical issues, man-made climate change, GMOs, fluoride, and other environmental issues" perhaps you would like a one way time travel ticket to London 1349?
Or maybe you should try out to be on that History Channel show "Alone".
You don't like anything about modern life and you think everyone else in the world is a liar. Why are you here?
"You don't like anything about modern life and you think everyone else in the world is a liar..."
What?! This is a fabulous time to be alive. And most of humanity has a conscience. Why are you making assumptions like that?
It's really not that NWO is playing at false equivalence a la Dr Jay or the other "vaccine safety advocates". He's in a third category, one which really should be obvious from his username (New World Order): his worldview revolves around an unshakable faith in the existence of a nefarious worldwide conspiracy that drives basically everything in order to keep us in line. HE believes this same conspiracy drives the pro-vax, the anti-vax, and the "vaccine safety" advocates, and probably pretty much everyone else as well, and everyone he encounters who does not agree with him is clearly either part of the conspiracy or a victim of its brainwashing.
So he does have a sort of equivalence going on, but not on the basis of the merits of their arguments, because he feels neither side has any merits to begin with. They're all working from a villainous ulterior motive to keep us all sick.
He doesn't offer any alternative, but he doesn't have to, really. His world view is a nihilistic one, in which we ultimately have very little real choice, only the illusion of one. Trust no one but yourself.
Once you work yourself into that world view, it's very difficult to get out. I don't think it's worth trying to persuade him of anything.
I don't intend to dox NWO reporter, and I don't think this piece of information does that, but it keeps bugging me, even though it's a small thing.
NWO reporter is a she. Please stop with the "he".
Not quite--I'm merely pointing out that we live in a world of disinformation, and controlled opposition is hardly a new idea.
There's a lot of good anti-vaccine information out there. Most of the best of it rarely gets any press, because that would only call attention to it. Again, hardly a revolutionary concept. So the best strategy, IMO, is to seek out the anti-vaccine sources that get little press attention.
Wakefield has done some good work, and he gets a lot of press. But what do you find if you decide to actually listen to the other side? You find out that, not only was his research replicated by others, but ... *drum roll* ... he's not even anti-vaccine! The furthest he ever went was to recommend the MMR be broken up into 3 separate shots. He's squarely in the "safer" vaccine camp.
Ha. Haha. Hshaha. Hahahahshahahahaha!
"Wakefield has done some good work?"
Stop it. You're killing me! Too, too funny!
Ah, me.
And, yes, I've listened to what Wakefield has said, and I've read a lot of his studies. THAT is why I found your characterization of his work so gut-bustingly hilarious.
Glad to return the favor, Orac--I've gotten quite a few laughs from your blog, too...in a dark way.
The idea that these folks who want "safer" vaccines, or want to customize the CDC schedule, are "anti-vaccine" is rather satirical.
It was no small coincidence he had a patent for a single measles vaccine was it?
NWO @ 42:
You're an idiot. Yes, inoculation with smallpox itself had been in use for a while--and people used it gladly, because a 5-10% of dying is better than 33-50%. What Jenner invented was vaccination with a different, harmless virus. (Vaccinia, hence the origin of the name.) Zero chance of dying was definitely better!
I swear, you antivaxxers break new ground in the field of ignorance every time you open your mouths!
"Zero chance of dying..." LOL. Too bad his little experiment was colossal failure. But no worries--there's basically nothing a little revision of history can't fix. :D
Right...the old "smallpox stopped killing people; therefore, vaccines" trope. Just like all those other diseases that stopped killing people. Sure, death rates plunged long before the vaccines. But it WAS before the vaccines. Therefore, vaccines. It's solid Vaccine Logic." :D
@NWO Reporter #42:
Inoculation means specifically smallpox innoculation. And yes, it was hardly a new idea. But it involved use of live smallpox virus. Generally it meant a milder version of the disease.
What Jenner did was create the first smallpox vaccine, from cowpox (hence the source of the term). The similar but benign disease provided immunity to small pox with far less risk. That vastly reduced risk, plus an easily obtained source, made mass vaccination and the possible eradication of smallpox possible.
Jenner didn't have to come up with the original idea to have the bigger one, and the one with vastly more importance.
Pray tell us how I'm "revising" history, you idiot. Tell us how smallpox went from killing a third of every new generation to obliteration--and don't bring up any moronic crap about "sanitation", either.
Is it in bad taste to want a set of icon-sized brass knuckles?
"What a Beautiful World This Would Be"
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Rawhide!
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Though the threads are swollen
Keep them comments trollin',
Rawhide!
Cherry pick!
(Head em' up!)
Move goalposts!
(Move 'em on!)
More insults!
(Head em' up!)
Rawhide!
Cut 'em out
(Paste 'em in!)
Paste'em in
(Cut em' out!)
Cut 'em out
Paste 'em in,
Rawhide!
Keep trollin', trollin', trollin'
Though they're disaprovin'
Keep them comments trollin'',
Rawhide
Don't try to understand 'em
Just rope, laugh, and ignore 'em
Soon we'll be discussin' bright without 'em
Today I had 5 marijuanas and a bourbon and coke.
The song is for the NWO troll.
There is a question none of the pro-vax brigade answer and that is: since vaccine theory and methodology was invented and applied during the time when science-medicine believed the brain and immune system were not connected, and in the last year or so it has been discovered there is, a powerful connection, which, according to the experts demands that textbooks be rewritten, should there be a limiting of vaccination until the research is done into this link and the affect that vaccines might have on the brain?
During the max-vax age we have seen epidemics of Autism and Behavioural and Learning Difficulties in children and Dementia and Alzheimer's in the aged. These are the two most vulnerable groups.
Since the brain/immune link can never have been studied in regard to vaccines, since it was not believed to exist, how can it be claimed that vaccines do not affect brain function?
# 5 Max King
That was an interesting article in the Conversation, and the abstract of the article looked interesting too. How many provinces does Australia have? Okay, it could have been a cut & paste error but still.
I was rather surprised to learn that we, in Canada, have no requirements for vaccination before children may attend school. All those reports about the thousands of children at risk of not being allowed to attend school in the Ottawa School board must have been a hoax last fall.
And that Ontario provincial legislation I was looking at last August or September must have been a figment of my imagination.
I am not terribly sure I'd trust Dr MacIntyre's opinions at the moment
Oz has 6 states and 2 territories, plus 3 dependencies.
I don't expect that the Commonwealth (federal) Government will succeed in passing legislation to prevent non-vaccinated children from attending child-care facilities (or kindergartens, or junior primary schools). The great majority of Australians find the idea offensive, disgraceful and stupid.
Prof MacIntyre's opinions are just that, opinions.- other than that she is a very highly regarded immunologist.
There is an emerging problem of increasing numbers of cases of preventable diseases occurring in young children . If a child in a child care facility comes down with the disease then the facility has to be closed down for a number of days - thus causing unnecessary hardship for those working parents who then have to arrange child minding.
lolwut?
There actually is something a scientist can do to ensure that he is permanently ostracized, his research funding eliminated, and his career ruined. That something is to be caught fabricating data. Which Wakefield did. That is why he was "struck off" (to use the UK term for having one's medical license revoked), and his Lancet paper retracted.
And if you were to devote a millisecond of thought to the matter, you would understand why fabricating data is considered a career-ending move. If you've done it once, who will trust you not to do it again? Indeed, as a quick perusal of Retraction Watch will inform you, most scientists who get caught fabricating data have done so repeatedly. The peer review system is not designed to catch intentional fraud; the reviewer must assume that the described experiments were performed and the described results obtained, an assumption which is almost always justified but that data fabricators exploit. Typically, one fabrication is discovered (sometimes by chance, other times by failure to replicate), and a subsequent investigation reveals other examples coming from the same lab.
LOL. Right. Don't bother getting the other side of the story! Wakefield can't be trusted! I mean, not like a pharmaceutical mega corporation that cares only about your health! And not like the CDC, with all their vaccine patents. Because, you know...CDC. But just in case...remember--Wakefield is pro-vaccine. :D
"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” Dr. Marcia Angell, http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2009/jan/15/drug-companies-doc…
He’s squarely in the “safer” vaccine camp.
Wakefield is squarely in the "mendacious result-faking wazzcock" camp.
@ Julian &Eric: or Baghdad Bob.
Agyric NWO with his/her/its insipid "measles in benign" screed should go visit this unvaxxed now measles-ridden hospitalized Australian politician..
Don’t bother getting the other side of the story!
I must have missed the side of the story in which Wakefield isn't a demonstrable liar.
Really, Herr Doktor? Poul Thorsen is a wanted fugitive for allegedly stealing over a million dollars he was supposed to be using on vaccine safety research, and I'm guessing you still cite his studies all the time. :)
What happens when you don't vaccinate your children.
Poul Thorsen? Jeeminy Priest, it's P.R.A.T.T.s all the way down....
"Refuted?" Sure--if by "refuted" you mean carefully whitewashed and swept under the rug. :)
No, by "refuted", I mean "involving a miscellaneous middle author out of dozens on one study, who got in trouble for something completely unrelated years later."
If the pro and anti vaccination sides both have it wrong and their stances are that vaccines are good, and that vaccines are bad..... then vaccines are neither good....nor bad.... Does that make vaccines a quantum uncertainty?
Guilt by association is all these antivaxxers have--Niels Bohr was a Dane, Poul Thorsen was a Dane...so the Copenhagen Interpretation is a conspiracy!
I take it that's why you rely exclusively on the purest of stale assertions. This is low-rent shіt by any measure.
But anyway, at least I finally got around to reinstalling the killfile today before fleeing the scene over here to save my sanity. It was really MJD that got me to grit my teeth long enough, but it was suffering well invested.
@ R. Ross #61:
Citation needed into the links between the brain and the immune system. Citation needed about which experts have asked for the textbooks to be rewritten and details about the rewrites they want made.
No. The risks of going unvaccinated are known. Stopping vaccination for a theoretical risk is unwise.
The autism-vaccine link has been investigated into the ground. There is no link. As for Dementia and Alzheimer's, those are diseases of old age, and the fact that people are living longer and surviving into old age means that these are more common.
Julian Frost, Roslyn Ross is a strong proponent of homeopathy. So reasoning with her is likely to be less than useful.
It's like this. I had to get out of bed and sober up in time for an 11.30 session with a client. Then I had to hold it together and stay coherent all afternoon for statistical advisory meetings with students. The fact that I can imitate "empathy" and "human behaviour" does not mean that I enjoy doing so, and I am not currently in the mood to play nice with trollish sophistry like this.
The subject of "Wakefield's honesty" came up because NWO Reporter mentioned it. And now NWO wants to change the subject to some completely different middle author of unrelated papers? This is the behaviour of a cowardly gobshite gutless waste of perfectly good organs. I an SHOCKED.
Please point to the papers in which I have cited Thorsen's work. Just one would be enough.
And while you're at it, there is the unanswered and previously-run-away-from question of whether NWO Reporter still stands by the mendacious crap puked out by the Daily Heil on Irish orphan farms and vaccine tests.
I have HAD IT with these motherfeckin gutless sh1tweasels on this motherfeckin comment thread.
Temper, Herr Doktor. :) So, are you saying you do NOT stand behind fugitive Poul Thorsen's studies?
R. Ross, first you have to prove that a link between vaccine and autism is really occuring. Good luck going against all the epidemiological studies that say there isn't.
Only then can you start talking about possible mecanisms.
I love how all the pro-vaxxers on here in the comments are not up to date on the REAL news behind Trump, RFK Jr. and the vaccine commission. Really shows how well the vaccine shills they do their homework...
And pardon me, but who's really against safer vaccines? Time to categorize them as a pharmaceutical along with all the associated safety & efficacy requirements, strip away the 0% liability (Bye bye 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act) and let the public decide on your wonderful product.
Among other things.
That reminds me that now that NWOR's been shіtcanned, the WP emoji Javascript needs to go in its entirely as well.
That came out a bit glib, didn't it?
There is evidence Dr. Thorsen committed embezzlement, which is a crime. That does not imply that his actually published research is fraudulent, and I am not aware of any evidence that the published research is fraudulent.
For the record, I am unlikely to cite Dr. Thorsen's work because I am in a different field, but if it were ever appropriate to do so, then I would do so. The closest parallel in my work is that I have cited papers by the guy who claimed that Earth's water was due to bombardment by small comets--the work I cited was from earlier in his career, before he went off the deep end, which he had already done by the time I started graduate school. (The link goes to the guy's review article on the subject; I haven't verified that the article text is available to all, but you can read the abstract even if you/your library doesn't have a subscription.)
BTW, the small comet guy is a refutation of your previous claim that people who defy the mainstream get their careers cut short. He continued to have a prominent career until he suffered a stroke a decade or so after that review article was published. Authorship in Reviews of Geophysics is by invitation only, and it is an official journal of the American Geophysical Union, a bona fide scientific society of which I am a member. His co-author remained active in the field until the latter's untimely death (at home, in bed, of a heart attack).
Do anti-vaxxers ever do their own homework? As awful of a visual as it is, I'm beginning to embrace HDB's invocation of the human-centipede style of information funneling.
You're not exactly familiar with what you're making typing noises about, are you?
I love how all the pro-vaxxers on here in the comments are not up to date on the REAL news behind Trump, RFK Jr. and the vaccine commission.
This was Charles Martell {OGD)'s opportunity to pass on the REAL news about this non-existent commission, but we remain deprived and ininformed.
Julian Frost (#20) asks,
Oh really? Would you please post links to the studies that show this to be the case, Michael.
MJD says,
I've over-posted (according to Orac the unforgiving) such studies in the past and am thereafter in permanent auto-moderation.
What's a "common name" for a naturally occurring polyisoprene that has allergenic proteins (hint: Hev-b) and is less often used in vaccine packaging?
@ Narad (#77),
It took over 5 years to place MJD in a killfile.
I know you won't be reading about MJD's valid concerns but in the spirit of brotherhood and respect, I'll keep commenting as if you were.
@Max King #63 - as an Australian, a doctor and a parent with kids in preschool, I disagree with your assertion that most Australians find the idea of 'no vax, no daycare' to be "offensive, disgraceful and stupid". The vast majority of Australians vaccinate. What most people would feel fits your 3 adjectives nicely, is people who selfishly put their children and others at risk because of their sanctimonious ideology. Science doesn't care what you think, and vaccine-preventable diseases don't care if your kale is organic.
@Charles Martrell ODG #83 - we don't let the public decide on vaccines for the same reason we don't generally allow any* important decision to be made by a large group of people with no relevant training or experience, or even enough basic science education to understand the information on which such decisions should be made.
*except elections, of course.
You are free to vaccinate your children. Presumably, you do so because you believe it protects them. So why would you fear the unvaccinated? How could you in good conscience force others to submit to a medical procedure against their will? Have you ever heard of the Nuremberg Code?
Vaccines have known risks, up to and including death. That's why the US has a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. You are free to submit your children to those risks if you wish. You are not free to force others to do so.
"We don't let the public decide on vaccines." Oh, really? And who is "we"? I guess the answer is easier if you exclude all the medical professionals and scientists who do not share your love of vaccines, and only listen to the "officially approved experts." I wonder if you will feel the same about all their future demands for your submission.
"no vax, no daycare" means a child will be excluded from day care if not vaccinated - most Australians find it offensive that the child is doubly punished for the parents' stupidity.
Now, if you go back to my original comments at #5, then you will read "It’s quite simple – the antivaxxer’s crusade is tantamount to child abuse.",
What that statement means is "I believe that the antivaxxers crusade is “offensive, disgraceful and stupid” and if you read my comments in the link at #5, along with Prof. Raina MacIntyre's, and Dr Sue Ieraci's you would have discovered that we all (like most Australians) have made it clear that we
agree with your disapproval of "people who selfishly put their children and others at risk because of their sanctimonious ideology."
Therefore, your comment "Science doesn’t care what you think, and vaccine-preventable diseases don’t care if your kale is organic" is ignorant, spiteful and piteous.
You've got to be careful with the novel genuflection to authority, Max. Sticking to the usual script will help avoid confusion. :D
A really good high-quality troll would at least come up with something original and put some thought into this one. Hint: what ages are vaccines given? Why do we receive boosters? And have you ever heard of herd immunity and herd effect?
Of course we have have you? Can you please illustrate how vaccines are given against one's will?
Yes, yes. We all know the human cattle theory. Aren't you supposed to be calling it "community immunity" now? Are you getting lax on your training? Under either name, it's still total bunk, as it's always been.
And of course it deflects from the issue of why any member of the "herd" that is vaccinated is at risk, if they are "protected." Total misdirection fail.
In any case, vaccines cannot, and will never be able to, provide so-called herd immunity--for one, because they are unlikely to provide lifelong protection, like natural infection and recovery does.
You must not live in California, where children must be fully vaccinated to get an education. Or in Australia, where children must be fully vaccinated for their family to receive the child benefit. Or are you cleverly trying to pretend that twisting arms qualifies as "voluntary" consent?
SM: "A really good high-quality troll would at least come up with something original and put some thought into this one"
And they never give me a good answer on how to protect babies under age one year from measles, mumps and chicken pox. The NWO Troll is just has boring and clueless as my crazy aunt over forty years ago.
Basic hygiene, commonsense precautions, and breastfeeding from a healthy mother who has acquired lifelong immunity from natural infection and recovery is your best bet.
Oh, well, here is one really good reason to fear the unvaccinated:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-measles-sspe-20150624-story…
Aww does poor wittle snookums object to be likened to animals? Get over it snowflake, we're a herd. Please bestow more of your ignorance why there isn't herd immunity or herd effect. I'm game.
Epi 101 fail on your part is more like it. Vaccines aren't 100% efficacious, infants too young to be vaccinated can't get, you know vaccinated along with medically-fragile people. Measles was no longer endemic in the U.S. since the early noughties until boneheads like you decided "natural immunity" is so much better. The former didn't happen by accident or even with a perfect vaccine.
But yet full series of measles, rubella and polio do just that. Another epi fail on your part but given what a boring troll you are, not surprised.
More speshul snowflake syndrome. That isn't forced vaccination sweepea. Learn words; they matter.
Have you written any books or blog posts on being a good mother, Science Mom? Based on your response, I think people deserve a warning--since it appears that derision and condescension is your recommended method for dealing with adversity.
Why don't you go ahead and tell us what percentage of vaccinated people are at risk of contracting the disease they were vaccinated for, SM. And of those, how many in the industrialized world are at risk of serious lasting damage from that infection.
Oh praytelll which other pro-science female blogger do you think I am? Because we all must be the same person flaccid small-thinkers like you.
Could you be any more vague? And while you're at it why don't you stick to your original claims. You seem to have a very bad habit of trying to deflect from your chasmic insufficiencies. Ireland and FOIA anyone?
I asked a very straightforward question, SM. And it does not surprise me at all that you do not want to answer it. :D
Which one is the straightforward question? You can't stick to a single train of thought so it doesn't surprise me you can't ask a straightforward question then proclaim some kind of victory when it goes unanswered.
Charles Martel #83
We have. Most parents choose to protect their children with vaccines.
NWO Reporter #92
You are not free to submit my children to the risks of preventable infectious diseases in a classroom setting.
So your child is vaccinated, but NOT protected from risk? I thought that was the point of vaccinating.
NWO Troll: "Basic hygiene, commonsense precautions, and breastfeeding from a healthy mother"
And the idiocies continue! My fully breastfed six month old got chicken pox. Obviously you reply will be because I was not healthy. Pray tell... what is the criteria for the perfectly healthy mother?
By the way, you need to provide PubMed indexed articles by reputable qualified researchers to support your answer. You will also need to provide the verifiable citations to support the rest of your silly claims on how to protect a child under age one year.
By the way, NWO Troll, what evidence do we have that you were a "good mother"? I believe the "Nirvana Fallacy" and teenage to thirty years old offspring are not compatible.
Chemmomo: "You are not free to submit my children to the risks of preventable infectious diseases in a classroom setting"
Apparently “Basic hygiene, commonsense precautions, and breastfeeding from a healthy mother” according to her are what can prevent a measles infection and resultant death from SSPE from happening. Isn't that cute?
Actually it is absolutely stupefying idiocy to the nth degree. This is why she is a troll. And an idiot. And completely clueless.
Plus she is incredibly lazy. It is apparently much to [whine]... h...a...r....d...[/whine] to use the handy dandy search box at the top of this page to see whatever silly trope she drags out from the land of zombie arguments has been addressed (some are over a decade old!).
NWO Troll: "So your child is vaccinated, but NOT protected from risk?"
What about children too young to be vaccinated? So do tell me how to protect a child under age one from measles, mumps and chicken pox.
Be sure to provide some actual evidence other than the super idiotic “Basic hygiene, commonsense precautions, and breastfeeding from a healthy mother." Just provide the PMIDs to support your answer.
By the way, in 1968 I got mumps for a second time. My mother was surprised. Apparently "natural immunity" is not perfect! Which makes me ask: why do you think vaccines should be better than the diseases in providing immunity? Oh, wait... another Nirvana Fallacy.
You are really a very lame troll. Those "arguments" are so very old and stale.
NWO Reporter, do you read the replies to your own comments?
My question was not answered. So let me ask you: What is the percentage risk of your child contracting the infection he was vaccinated for--meaning the vaccine fails to protect him? And if the vaccine fails to protect him, and he contracts the infection, what is the percentage risk your child will die or suffer serious lasting harm from the infection, as opposed to recovering fully? Pick your disease and answer with some numbers.
NWO Troll: "So your child is vaccinated, but NOT protected from risk? I thought that was the point of vaccinating."
Again, please provide your proven plan to protect children under age one year from measles, mumps and chicken pox. Make sure that instead of "argument from assertion" that you actually provide PubMed index studies by reputable qualified researchers you method actually works.
I ask this as someone who had to deal with a six month baby who only had breast milk with chicken pox, a year before the varicella vaccine was approved. What scientifically proven method exists to prevent the two terrible weeks we endured with a baby in lots of pain?
Make sure you provide verifiable citations. Just give us the PMIDs.
Anybody who claims there's no such thing as herd immunity is committed to the view--since the arithmetic is identical--that there's no such thing as a subcritical mass of plutonium; assemble any amount, no matter how small, and it will explode.
OK, start tap-dancing. Why doesn't it?
NWO Troll: "What is the percentage risk of your child contracting the infection he was vaccinated for–meaning the vaccine fails to protect him?"
What is the percentage of American children vaccinated for measles, mumps, rubella and vacicella? It is a simple number that is easily verified.
It is also pertinent to answering the question I posed to you a few times. Do please provide the PubMed indexed papers by reputable qualified researchers to support your answer on how to protect babies under age one year from measles, mumps and chicken pox.
Crud... it is too late at night, and some crucial bits was missing in my comment (I thunk it, but did not type it!). The relevant is in bold:
What is the percentage of American children under age one year are vaccinated for measles, mumps, rubella and vacicella? It is a simple number that is easily verified.
It is also pertinent to answering the question I posed to you a few times. Do please provide the PubMed indexed papers by reputable qualified researchers to support your answer on how to protect babies under age one year from measles, mumps and chicken pox.
NWO Reporter
Pertussis. Calfiornia, 2016: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/Pertussis_report_20…
My county’s one of the “higher than statewide average.”
That was an easy year. Then there’s 2010, https://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/PertussisReport2010…
20 cases per 10.000 Californians, 38% hospitalized, 10 deaths.
OK, so my children are no longer infants (and therefore less at risk for death), but I still don’t understand why you think they should hack up their lungs for three months because you are afraid of. . . not even sure what it is that you are afraid of.
The info you provided doesn't mention the failure rate of the vaccine. There are a lot of pertussis vaccines on the CDC schedule: at 2 months, 4 months, 6 months, 15 months, 4 years, 11 years. The CDC claims the vaccine is "effective" but does not provide lasting protection. All vaccines have known risks that are not disputed.
There is research that suggests the vaccine is provides no protection at all--in one study, showing that 81% of confirmed pertussis infections occurred in children who had had all the CDC recommended vaccinations, and were infected at the same rate as unvaccinated children. It's discussed in this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4fZbWh_b08
Based on the numbers you provided, the risk of contracting a serious (although likely not deadly) case of pertussis in 2016 in California was about .0000024. By contrast, the risk of dying in a car crash in California is about .000078 -- a lot higher. The risk of dying from pertussis at any age was minuscule.
Taking the worse year, 2010, the risk of contracting a serious (although likely not deadly) case of pertussis was about .000008 -- just slightly higher than the risk of dying in a car crash. Again, the risks of death from pertussis were minuscule.
Here's another interesting video, which discusses one non-vaccinating parent's experience with a whooping cough outbreak at school. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qeg3QAVbWo
Here's the first video in a series discussing why natural infection and recovery from pertussis, although unpleasant, is superior to vaccination, which at best, provides transient protection from the expression of pertussis symptoms. It can give you a starting point for issues you may want to investigate further. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYY4QMldXE0
NWO @94.
I would cheerfully genuflect to some of the world's greatest scientists and thinkers; it would be my way of showing them my deepest admiration and gratitude for revealing the secrets of nature and human kind. Hence I would not take offence if I was identified as genuflecting. However, I am disappointed when a silly, naive, petulant person attempts to be clever (and I assume insulting) by the misuse of that noble word., To further embarrass yourself you qualified the noun "genuflection" with the nonsensical, and inapt adjective "novel".
You do write some very childish, and often ignorant comments. It seems that you attempt to invigorate your ego, your sense of self, by being an invisible smart-arse who seeks to antagonise people with pseudo-intellectual gibberish and convoluted petulance.
The challenge for you, if you wish to take it, is to grow up.
How could you in good conscience force others to submit to a medical procedure against their will? Have you ever heard of the Nuremberg Code?
Oh look, some numpty has heard of the Nuremberg Code but not read it.
Great post Orac, and thanks for chanelling Leonard. What a guy!!!
@Max King #93:
1) Citation/Supporting Evidence needed for your claim that "most Australians" find it offensive.
2) As I said to Beth Clarkson on an earlier thread:
It's not about punishment.
It's about PROTECTION.
It's about the fact that intentionally unvaccinated and undervaccinated children are more susceptible to diseases and more likely to spread them to those who are immunosuppressed and those too young to be vaccinated.
Whinging about punishment is just a red herring.
Please read carefully -
Due to the parent's' stupidity: -
Punishment 1: child is unprotected against preventable diseases;
Punishment 2: child is barred from attending child care where it enjoys friends and activities.
Therefore *the child is doubly punished for the parents’ stupidity* and your diatribe is misguided.
A previous link provides responses from a cross-section of Oz parents.
I have the scar from the smallpox shot, and I ate several sugar cubes with pretty pink dots on them, and now you and your children don't, because smallpox is extinct in the wild, and polio is seriously endangered.
The only 'total bunk' here is the crap you post, you freaking idiot.
Or better yet, have him explain what happened to Rinderpest....not exactly a situation where one can credit "sanitation" for eradicating the disease.
The troll also ignores the basic science of immunology, where some percentage of people won't gain immunity from getting the disease in the first place - since those people can get infected multiple times.
Also, "natural" immunity and community immunity (or herd immunity) break down when new, non-immune people are added to any population (new babies being born), which is one reason why diseases were (and are) cyclical - a mass outbreak would infect large numbers of people, reaching the critical mass to break the disease infection chain and the outbreak would end.
Over time, with new, non-immune people added to the population, once the immunity threshold is broken, the disease would take hold once again & there would be another large outbreak (punctuated by mass pandemics when new strains emerged or new populations were exposed to otherwise unknown diseases).
With the advent of vaccines & mass vaccinations, it was now possible to prevent disease transmission and outbreaks from occurring in the first place. If a disease like measles (which has not other hosts but humans) can't infect anyone in a given population, then the disease dies out.
Even in a small percentage of the population isn't vaccinated or doesn't gain immunity from the vaccine, enough people around them are immune so they never get exposed to the disease.
This is exactly how eradication works. If you read about the ring-vaccination strategy used to finally eradicate Smallpox, you'd gain a much deeper understanding about how diseases spread & how they can be contained and finally gotten rid of entirely.
Diseases that also have animal hosts are nearly impossible to eradicate, but we can at least use vaccines to prevent transmission as much as possible.
None of this is rocket science - it's basic immunology and epidemiology. One only needs to look at the transmission profile and history of measles - one of, if not the most contagious disease on the planet, to see exactly how vaccination has been successful in reducing the incidence of this disease to near 0 in most developed countries and significantly across the developing world.
If a vaccine like the MMR wasn't hugely effective in preventing mass transmission of a disease as contagious as measles, it would be evident nearly immediately.....we can see how quickly elimination can occur, when we see over 90,000 cases in a mass outbreak in the United States in the early 1990s, and we go to complete elimination of domestic measles in less than 10 years.
We also now see the elimination of Rubella in the Western Hemisphere.
For someone not to recognize the mechanisms of vaccines and the attendant successes, is truly to be an ignorant fool.
Dumbass. Different diseases, different vaccine schedules, effectiveness. What is the endemicity/epidemic circulation?
What I find slightly interesting is that ignorant fools come in two opposing flavors.
You have the NWO Reporter fool, who denies what is plainly obvious to the most casual observer, and you have the MJD fool, who teachs "allergy-induced regressive autism", yet nobody else on the planet believes such thing exist.
Anti-vaxers hide their ignorance of science behind a veil of conspiracy...which is obviously what our new resident troll has done.
Stack his assertions of conspiracy against the actual science and experience of those in the field, who actually do the research, deal with the outbreaks, and understand the basic tenants of immunology, biology, epidemiology, and you see truly how ridiculous her statements are.
You take something as complex as the last major measles outbreak in the United States, where more than 90,000 cases were reported, including a number of deaths.
This happened in what was assumed to be a highly vaccinated population - but further research showed that the recommendations at the time were ultimately insufficient to reach the immunity threshold for the US population.
Adding the extra dose of MMR & the subsequent mass vaccination campaign that took place from the early 1990s, allowed the US to eliminate domestic measles in less than 10 years...meaning there was no circulating or endemic measles in the entire population.
For a disease which will infect between 75 - 85% of everyone (not immune) who comes in contact with it, can exist in the air & on surfaces for hours, and is readily transmissible from person to person, that says quite a bit for the effectiveness of the vaccine.
As for longevity of the immunity given, all current research shows that the measles component, at minimum, lasts for decades....enough, at this point, to continue to prevent outbreaks of this highly contagious disease in vaccinated populations to the extent that we saw historically.
Again, this is both confirmed by the actual research and the experiences that we've had over the last three decades...all confirming the validity of the success of the vaccine.
Neither does wild-type infection and the child suffers far more.
What is a journal article too hard for you? I'm going to guess you don't have a clue what attack rate is and disease attenuation.
Basic hygiene, commonsense precautions, and breastfeeding from a healthy mother who has acquired lifelong immunity from natural infection and recovery is your best bet.
And yet, this didn't work for children of any age before 1963 (measles), 1967 (mumps) or 1995 (chickenpox).
No one in the industrialized world was afraid of those diseases in the 1950s and 1960s, before the vaccines--they were considered a normal right of passage in childhood, and most children never even required any medical care. The objective is not to avoid those infections. The objective is to contract and recover from them naturally, thereby generally acquiring lifelong immunity, a stronger immune system, and increased resistance to certain cancers later in life.
And my anti-vaxx bingo card is full now. There are certain people you come across and hope they aren't in charge of any lives.
Is it time to start making fun of her artistic endeavors yet?
A youtube video by Forrest Maready shot apparently in front of his living room curtain). The qualifications that Forrest Maready has to discuss vaccinations and other medical issues are ... exactly none. But that is OK, his videos are just his incredible opinion. His opinions are exactly that: without credibility.
Comparing the intelligence of the troll to that of a sack of hammers leads to the sack of hammers emerging victorious.
They were considered a normal right of passage, solely because nothing could be done to stop children catching them. I well remember the lack of medical care when my younger brother caught measles - just a week in hospital.
You need to carefully explain to my mother how this works. She had chickenpox as a child and then caught it again in her 30s when I brought it home from school. She later told me she had never been so sick until she got the cancer that killed her.
In fact NWO, you are completely full of it.
Dr. Hickie,
This Epic fail (https://youtu.be/8-xuIyIQ2_U) is a lot more entertaining than the epic fail gracing our comment section here. I'm pretty sure you'll find a good character in the movies to compare to the epic fail here.
Al
1) This is the Naturalistic Fallacy writ large. Even very healthy children died or suffered consequences like blindness, deafness, sterility, lung damage, liver damage, brain damage or general organ damage from these diseases.
2) Measles is known to destroy immune memory, meaning that people who get infections and gain immunity to them get that immunity wiped out by a measles infection and become susceptible to them again.
3) There is little more than circumstantial evidence that these illnesses prevent cancer in later life.
4) Hepatitis B can cause liver cancer and hpv can cause cervical and other cancers. Immunisation, by giving immunity to these diseases, stops these cancers.
1) False, post 1950. At most, extremely rare, occurring in people who appeared to be healthy and well-nourished, but had underlying unidentified health conditions or nutritional deficiencies.
2) Speculative. Not a risk for healthy, well-nourished children.
3) False. There is considerable evidence that these infections prevent certain cancers later in life.
4) Vaccines do not confer immunity. Babies in the industrialized world have virtually no risk of Hep B unless the mother is infected. The mother can be and generally is tested. The Hep B vaccine given to infants is among the greatest crimes against humanity when it comes to vaccines.
"2) Measles is known to destroy immune memory,"
A very important comment such as this requires confirmation. At the risk of being helpful I offer the following link:
Long-term measles-induced immunomodulation increases overall childhood infectious disease mortality
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4823017/
"Measles vaccines were introduced 50 years ago and were followed by striking reductions in child morbidity and mortality. Measles control is now recognized as one of the most successful public health interventions ever undertaken."
How can anyone trust a study that commences with such blatantly false propaganda? The most "striking reductions" in deaths from measles and other common diseases by a very wide margin occurred from the late 19th century through the first half of the 20th century in the industrialized world, long before the measles vaccine. The vaccine was introduced at the tail end of a steadily declining trend in deaths that had been going on for nearly a century, and presumably would have continued, with or without the vaccine.
Where's your evidence?
Here's one. www.vaccinationcouncil (dot) org/2014/06/24/measles-and-measles-vaccines-fourteen-things-to-consider-by-roman-bystrianyk-co-author-dissolving-illusions-disease-vaccines-and-the-forgotten-history/
Or do your own search for graphs of mortality rates from around 1900-present. Not truncated graphs only going back to 1950 or so, because those are misleading. And not incidence rates--mortality rates.
NWO @139
Evidence please - or am I correct in assessing your silly comments as hallucinations?
1)
Extremely rare thanks to vaccines. And you're wrong. Dana McCaffrey was breastfed and well-nourished. Pertussis still killed her. Ditto Olivia Dahl and measles.
2)
Not speculative. I was going to post a link but I see Max King beat me to it.
3)
Then Post this evidence.
4)Vaccines do not confer immunity
Every single disease we vaccinate against has seen a massive fall in incidence. When vaccine programs break down, the diseases recur. Syria had a polio outbreak after the start of the civil war. When the Soviet Union disintegrated, diphtheria came roaring back. Care to explain how that happened if vaccines don't work?
Hepatitis B virus can survive outside the body for up to a week. Children bite and scratch each other, share food utensils, get cuts and scrapes on playgrounds etc. The risk is low because we vaccinate.
Nice little bait and switch there, NWO Reporter. From the first paragraph of the extract:
So the measles took out immune memory, rendering people susceptible to dying from other infections.
Just because medical science had got better at preventing death from measles doesn't mean it was going away, or that the decline would continue.
increased resistance to certain cancers later in life.
That line of bafflegab was all covered a few weeks ago. Vinu is more fun about it -- he actually believes the stuff he spouts, and is less of a gutless gobsh1te when shown to be wrong.
LOL. "Shown to be wrong." I guess if your definition of 'wrong' is: "I don't like what those studies found, and therefore I choose to disregard them." :D
Oh the old mortality and morbidity confusion lie. WHo would have guessed from an anti-vaxxer.
Roman Bystrianyk's qualifications to write about vaccination are a BS in Engineering and an MS in Computer Science. I am deeply impressed.
We must admire NWO reporter's tireless efforts to insult reality. To duck and weave and slither and leap over and around and under reality shows a bulldog-like tenacity to capture an audience to feed her perverse ego. NWO reporter is surely a wild imagination fuelled by diabolical hallucinations.
Roman Bystrianyk’s qualifications to write about vaccination are a BS in Engineering and an MS in Computer Science.
My first qualification was in theoretical physics, the second one was in psychology, but I've never let that hold me back from writing and getting published about (say) mercury neurotoxicity (or anything else that comes along). So I have t deprecate the idea that credentials are an indicator of expertise.
Does bloviating constitute "refuting the evidence" in theoretical physics, too? :D
I'm really amazed at NWO. Obviously, she doesn't really remember the 50s and 60s. I very well remember the 60s and my mother and grandfather's huge relief when the measles, mumps and rubella vaccines, then the MMR, became available. I have my grandmother's letters from WWII - the 3 years my grandfather was overseas. The first year and third year, my mom and uncle had 1 - 2 colds. The second year, my mom brought home mumps, then measles from school. My uncle nearly died from the measles due to high fever. My mom missed 1/3 of the school year due to a cold about every other week the rest of the year. No change in diet, exercise, exposure to other children. Only the measles.
My GP grandfather, who practiced from the 1930s to the 1980s, made sure we got every vaccine available because he KNEW and SAW what happened to "well-nourished, healthy children". I have his daybook where he recorded home visits - along with the blotched pages where he cried when he recorded a child's death from VPD. And, true, very few children went to the hospital for measles, mumps, rubella, etc. Hospitals were very expensive and doctors commonly made house calls. There were a lot more community nurses, too.
But obviously, according to NWO, the children who died weren't meant to live. And, it's also very nice that she can afford to live on one income when a family is in 21 day quarantine (which is extended every time a new case in the family starts) and SOMEONE has to stay home with the kids.
And I HAD those disease, but only developed "natural immunity" to rubella. So NWO is wrong - natural immunity isn't "life-long". But then, she's wrong about so many things. Sad, really.
And yet researchers who studied this drop in overall mortality rates, related to other vaccine preventable diseases, found it across multiple countries, including developing ones...which is why their hypothesis that measles damages or resets the immune system is a viable one.
I have yet to see any information from the resident troll that measles or any other VPD is "beneficial."
In other anti-vax news..
RFK jr's group plans a rally in Washington DC next Thursday and Mike Adams ( Natural News) will provide support, urging his followers to phone bomb officials and DJT.
They'll never stop will they?
So, the resident troll ignores the bold-faced fact that incidence rates didn't decline until after mass vaccination.
Of course mortality rates dropped, upon the utilization of modern medical treatments. Using iron lungs to keep kids from dying of polio or antibiotics to treat secondary infections, like pneumonia.
No modern treatment, however, could prevent SSPE, sterility, blindness or deafness, or deaths and disability from CRS, for instance.
In fact, during the 1960's Rubella epidemic, more than 10,000 deaths were attributed to the disease - most of them babies.
And again, these diseases were not considered "benign." They were considered inevitable. Parents just had to hope that their child was one of those who didn't suffer life-long injury from the disease.
The mortality rates did not drop due to "modern medical treatments." They dropped due to vast improvements in nutrition, sanitation and living conditions implemented in late 19th and early 20th centuries.
You have provided no evidence that, even though mortality rates dramatically declined prior to the vaccines, serious lasting harm from the infections did not. On its face, it's nonsensical.
Your rubella scare stories are false. http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/30/false-government-rubella-s…
The criteria for polio diagnosis was changed dramatically shortly after the vaccine was licensed, resulting in an illusory 90% reduction in polio rates. Iron lungs are still around--we call them ventilators.
Please, try citing some actual medical information instead of Miller.
http://www.asha.org/PRPSpecificTopic.aspx?folderid=8589934680§ion=C…
Just an example - just because kids didn't die of these diseases to the extent that they used to, didn't mean that kids didn't still suffer the side effects of the diseases.
You really are an idiot, aren't you?
Also, in the developing world, we see the same drop in incidence after mass vaccination, that we saw in the US & other developed countries.
You want to argue mortality rates & claim that sanitation had something to do with it? How about antibiotics, which basically wiped out Scarlett Fever and prevented people from dying of pneumonia due to secondary infections?
http://documents.nationaldb.org/dbp/apr2005.htm#changes
Another example of how vaccines have prevented childhood injury by disease.
http://www.vashonloop.com/article/rubella-epidemic-1964-65
And a personal story.....
https://www.verywell.com/growing-up-deaf-rubella-1046568
Explain why the mortality rate for Smallpox never dropped - it still killed between 35% - 95% of people who were infected, right up until eradication.
Given your unfamiliarity with everything epidemiology, it's no surprise you also don't seem to know where a rapid response falls in the hierarchy of evidence.
It has occurred to me that teh NWOR would've fit right in at Prenda.
NWO Troll: "No one in the industrialized world was afraid of those diseases in the 1950s and 1960s,...."
Wrong, wrong, wrongety wrong. What is the date of this paper:
A STATISTICAL STUDY OF MEASLES (1914)
Why do you hate healthy children, and wish for them to experience very nasty diseases:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-measles-sspe-20150624-story…
By the way have you figured the percentage of American children under age one year that have had an MMR vaccine?
Citation needed.
Oh heck with it. You're talking utter hogwash. The claim that polio was relabeled has been refuted on this blog before.
Polio sufferers who used iron lungs had to live inside them. Also, they could never not be ventilated. Hardly anyone needs to be permanently ventilated today.
NWO Troll: "Your rubella scare stories are false...."
You cited an comment stream! Bah, ha ha ha! Again with your theme song:
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Rawhide!
Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Though the threads are swollen
Keep them comments trollin',
Rawhide!
Cherry pick!
(Head em' up!)
Move goalposts!
(Move 'em on!)
More insults!
(Head em' up!)
Rawhide!
Cut 'em out
(Paste 'em in!)
Paste'em in
(Cut em' out!)
Cut 'em out
Paste 'em in,
Rawhide!
Keep trollin', trollin', trollin'
Though they're disaprovin'
Keep them comments trollin'',
Rawhide
Don't try to understand 'em
Just rope, laugh, and ignore 'em
Clifford Miller?? She linked to an opinion piece by CLIFFORD MILLER?? Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Oh man, I haven't laughed so hard in AGES. That's almost as bad as linking to Wakefraud or Mikey.
I also note she had no reply to my (very long, sorry) comment about my mom and grandfather. NWO is basking in her priviledge, and Dunning Kruger effect.
Teh NWOR's routine really isn't very well deployed, is it? Iron lungs, of course, have not been "renamed" (like polio! and smallpox!) – they've always been ventilators.
The fact that that teh NWOR never gives any sign of thought regarding type of ventilation is par for the course. I have my own set of biases (a friend whom everybooy thought had beaten GVHD, my mom after development of catastrophic Herceptin resistance), but I think I'd much prefer NPV if the choice were available, which is a subject I've only had a cursory glance at.
Resident troll:
Strangely, the illusion must also affect pediatric ICUs, where we see no children spending months on ventilators for respiratory paralysis, and it also extends to paralytic limb paralysis.
Tell us NWO, what has replaced all the store rooms full of leg calipers, and where have all the kids with crippled, shrivelled limbs gone to? Maybe you don't see any because they are all stuck at home in their basements, playing minecraft from their wheelchairs?
Prior to the vaccine, there were two types of polio, paralytic and non-paralytic. Most children recovered fully from both types. The year following the introduction of the polio vaccine, the CDC changed the diagnostic criteria for polio--changes that automatically eliminated two thirds of the cases of paralytic polio, and eliminating all diagnoses of non-paralytic polio.
The symptoms that would have previously been labeled non-paralytic polio were instead diagnosed as viral or aseptic meningitis. Symptoms that had previously been labeled paralytic polio were labeled Guillain-Barre Syndrome, or one of several other diseases with symptoms that are clinically similar to those of polio. A similar slight of hand was used in India more recently. Even as polio was allegedly eliminated by the vaccine, there has been a corresponding dramatic increase in the number of cases of Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis--the symptoms of which are clinically identical to polio.
Notice the troll continuing to move goalposts....
Congratulations. You managed to be both fractally wrong and not even wrong in a single sentence. That claim has been refuted on this blog already.
NWO Troll: "Symptoms that had previously been labeled paralytic polio were labeled Guillain-Barre Syndrome, or one of several other diseases with symptoms that are clinically similar to those of polio."
Again, that is the most idiotic anti-vaccine trope ever, because in the 1950s they could tell the difference between the three different serotypes of polio. Hence the creation of this wall of polio: http://www.virology.ws/2015/07/02/the-wall-of-polio-version-3-0/
And now with more modern methods of studying viruses it is an even more idiotic argument. And truly a sign that the troll really really hates kids.
Yet another example of a troll not even knowing the basics of virology either.
NWOR here is a short reading assignment for you to read (and understand): Environmental Engineering and Sanitation (latest edition) by Joseph A. Salvato, P.E.. Once you have read and understood Salvato please then come back with your diatribe about nutrition, sanitation and living conditions are the cure all for everything.
Oh by the way, my Salvato edition is only 1200 pages and the newer editions are longer.
Her real name is W.S. Pratt.
Didn't NWOR just present herself as the paragon of reason by excoriating pro and anti-vaxx positions? And then go on to puke up the hoariest of hoary anti-vaxx tropes?
It's more useful to understand something rather than nothing. Any sentient being who is interested in this subject should be able to apprehend that many viruses (including non-polio enteroviruses, coxsackieviruses and echoviruses) cause flaccid paralysis. Indeed, the landscape has changed now that polio has been hamstrung--but most people should be capable of understanding what that means.
I would mildly suggest that the degree to which one should have credentials in the field may vary with the degree to which one is declaring the field to be full of "illusions" which one is about to "dissolve" with the power of one's mighty intellect.
The most pathetic part of the latter item is that the ridicule wasn't directed so much at teh NWOR as at Thompson, as foolishly channeled by the former's exquisitely developed gut–connection.
Despite knowing full well that the law says nothing whatever about document retention and – rather than arguring that one must be implicit* – she simply decided to go with squirting bad faith all over the place and frosting it with smilies.
* Unlikely to go well, but at least honest.
^ "gut–brain" connection, that is.
No one in the industrialized world was afraid of those diseases in the 1950s and 1960s,
You are fuller of tripe than the belly of a cow. I was around during the 1950s and 1960s. Were you?
You are fuller of tripe than the belly of a cow.
"Fuller of sh1t than a two-stone seagull", my friend Claire was wont to say (she was an Essex girl).
Ugh. NWO you are making me angry. My uncle died from polio in 1944; by all family accounts he died a painful and horrible death. My mother also got it and suffered from problems with her left leg for the rest of her life (thankfully she did not need leg braces). When the polio vaccine came out, parents lined up around the building to get it for their kids. It's why parents in developing nations, when they hear about a vaccination clinic, walk miles with their kids to get them vaccinated. They still have to cope with these illnesses and they understand how important they are.
Look up the differences in how negative pressure ventilation (Iron lung) and positive airway pressure (PAP) ventilation work to understand what an incredibly STUPID thing you said earlier about ventilators.
NPV may still have its uses, but it has more drawbacks which is why we don't see it in widespread use.
Going back to the original topic, and completely ignoring the Troll: So, Heckenlively is back, like a bad case of shingles.
I had wondered where he was hiding out. The antivax "story" has to get darker, because as the ones telling the tale become older and see no progress in their crusade the enemy must become more powerful, more overarching and harder to combat. Kent will eventually run out of steam, but how much damage can he do in the mean time ? I hope it's not much.
^Shingles!
Perhaps NWO would look more positively on vaccines if she had ever had shingles.
*shudder
It's a horrifying experience that I hesitate to wish on anyone....almost.
And yet not as horrifying as so many preventable diseases.
Shingles is horrible; therefore, vaccines. That's some sound vaccine logic! The incidence of shingles has increased since the chicken pox vaccine. But on the plus side, it's really opened up the market for the shingles vaccine! Too bad it only seems to be about 51% effective. But it's a vaccine! What could possibly go wrong? :D
Yep. Some day, all us old farts will die off, and all the babies who never had chicken pox will grow up and not get shingles or the shingles shot. That will probably piss you right off, and that suits me just fine.
Sure! We can play Let's Pretend. Let's pretend the chickenpox vaccine always prevents chickenpox infection. Let's pretend it provides lifetime protection, too! And while we're at it, let's pretend it's going to prevent shingles down the road! It's fun playing Let's Pretend in Vax Fantasy Land. :D
NWO Troll: "That’s some sound vaccine logic! The incidence of shingles has increased since the chicken pox vaccine."
Coincident to the Baby Boomers get old enough to get shingles. Funny how that happened.
"We can play Let’s Pretend."
Sure, can we pretend that you don't fall into using the Nirvana Fallacy?
LOL. Yes, of course--coincidence! Couldn't possibly be because periodic natural exposure to chicken pox helps build adult resistance to shingles. And because of the vaccine, adults are getting a lot less of it. Let's just pretend the vaccine is a miracle!
I wonder how all those vaccinated kids will fare when their resistance to chickenpox, to the extent they got any, wears off? But why quibble about unknowns? More vaccines for everyone! :D
Yes, let's! Let's pretend that the introduction of HPV Vaccine has reduced the incidence of cervical and other cancers!
Oh, wait. We don't have to pretend. It has.
You're hilarious! I mean, you would be, if you weren't trying to convince people to take a triple whammy of one of the most dangerous and unproven vaccines out there.
Citation needed. Giving the long ætiology of cervical cancer and the small numbers of people who actually took this horrendous aluminum-laden abomination, I doubt there is any study with sufficient statistical power to confidently make this claim.
@NWO Reporter:
Not dangerous, and not unproven.
@triskelethecat, or should I say Travis:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa0909537#t=article
https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/208/3/385/2192839/Reduction-in-Hum…
"Conclusions. Within 4 years of vaccine introduction, the vaccine-type HPV prevalence decreased among females aged 14–19 years despite low vaccine uptake. The estimated vaccine effectiveness was high."
Give me a break. "Estimated" vaccine effectiveness? Reductions in HPV incidence in a single age group despite low vaccine uptake? That doesn't even come close to proving that Gardasil has prevented a single case of cancer--or even a single case of HPV, for that matter. Gardasil only purports to protect against four of more than a hundred strains of HPV. It's a very common infection that the vast majority of people fully clear without any intervention whatsoever.
It would also be very interesting to know whether infertility increases along with vaccine "uptake." And whether other forms of cancer increase with "uptake" as well--considering the carcinogenic potential of the HPV vaccine is completely unknown. And it would be interesting to know how many lives were destroyed by the vaccine compared to the number destroyed by those four strains of HPV.
Yes it does. Your failure of reading comprehension does not refute that.
Four strains which have been implicated in most cases of cervical cancer.
Why don't you google it lazybones?
List some of these lives "destroyed by the vaccine". And please do not mention Madelyne and Olivia Meylor. Their case has been investigated.
Why don't you stop trying to deceive people into thinking that lame study you cited constitutes evidence that Gardasil prevents cancer. Oh, and you might want to ask the manufacturer why they are working on a "new and improved" version that protects against several more HPV strains, if the four covered by the current version are all that matter. Again, the vast majority of people fully clear all HPV infections without intervention or any serious consequences.
As for lives destroyed by the HPV vaccine, and possible implications in future fertility problems, there is a lot of information available on the web for anyone who's interested. Do you think countries around the world are backing off their recommendations for the vaccine for no reason? Your agenda is so transparent.
Yet another example of immunology fail.....
If you don't get chicken pox, you don't get Shingles.
Why is the so hard to get?
You can't seriously believe that getting a chickenpox vaccine means no chickenpox infection for a lifetime. Vaccine failure rates of up to 44% have been observed. How good is the protection? Does it protect against infection, or only the symptoms of infection? How long does it last? Does avoiding this generally mild childhood infection have adverse health consequences down the road? These are unknowns. https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/197/7/944/798673/Primary-Vaccine-F…
Well, we know that about 6000 women die every year from HPV-derived Cervical Cancer, not to mention the others who die from the other Cancers caused by HPV.
What we don't know is whether the vaccine will improve the cancer rate, or make it worse. It could actually increase the risk of cancer if there has already been an HPV infection--and such infections can occur in childhood, and even in the womb, without any awareness of it. Is anyone being tested before getting vaccinated? Not that I've heard of. Further, the vaccine itself has never been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential.
The idea that the HPV vaccine will prevent any cancers at all is purely theoretical.
@Orac: Please remove the Travis socks with my other 'nym. I'll have to change my email.
Commenters: triskelethecat above is NOT me, but it is a 'nym I use for discus.
Done.
the shit Travis J. Schwochert returns as something from the cat box
It'll take Travis the joke a bit to work this email out.
@Dawn - I suspected as much.....he really does have too much time on his hands
@NWOR: strange that frequent exposure to chicken pox didn't keep my grandfather, who was a doctor and did house calls, from getting shingles. He was in AGONY for weeks. The minute the shingles vaccine became available, he got it.
I wonder why sensible people who have experienced VPDs and their sequelae are so eager to get vaccines and to have their children and grandchildren vaccinated?
Your anecdotal story about your grandfather, if true, means nothing when it comes to assessing whether the alleged benefits of either vaccine outweigh the risks. But I'm sure you know that already. :)
MI Dawn, just as you were typing that, I was summoning the hammer with a rude comment regarding Travis J. Schwochert.
<sarcasm>Isn't it cute</sarcasm> when idiots get hold of terms like "hand-waving" (or ad hominem) of which they have no idea of the meaning, and insist on using them repeatedly?
Jesus. Now he's using my real 'nym. I don't mention comma splices.
Travis: go back to your cellar. I won't type the rest of my thought, but it's not complimentary.
@NWO Reporter, let's stipulate for the sake of argument that exposure to poxy children prevents shingles in adults. What conceivable moral argument is there for allowing children to go unvaccinated so that they will get chickenpox *solely for the benefit of adults around them*, knowing, as you acknowledge, that the children in turn will be at risk of shingles? What moral justification is there for letting children suffer so adults have to go to the trouble of getting a vaccine?
In fact, your moral position is even worse if you assert that the shingles vaccine doesn't work, because then you're saying that it is right to condemn children to a future of suffering to protect adults to some degree from suffering.
On the contrary, it is the duty of adults -- of all people -- not to make others suffer for their comfort.
Oh, please. The overwhelming majority of children recover quickly, easily and fully from chickenpox. When I was a kid, the biggest point of discussion among us was how great it was to get a week off school and eat ice cream and watch TV all day. And many children experience growth spurts after such an infection--a testament to its reward, which is a hardier immune system.
Also, you are assuming the vaccine will prevent chickenpox infection. Yet vaccine failure rates as high as 44% have been observed. Is there protection against infection, or only the observable symptoms of infection? If there is genuine protection, how long does it last? It's naive to assume that just because there is a vaccine for something, its potential benefits outweigh its risks and possible adverse consequences.
Grrr typo: What moral justification is there for letting children suffer so adults *won't* have to go to the trouble of getting a vaccine?
Also, before anyone jumps on me: I'm not saying that it is true that exposure to poxy children prevents shingles, only that even if it is true, it's no excuse for not preventing chickenpox.
Let's not play the antivax game of focusing only on deaths from infectious disease.
With HPV, there are approximately 14 million new infections annually. Since about 9 of 10 of those infections will resolve on their own within 2 years, that leaves 1.4 million people newly placed at risk of cancer every year. Many of them will be on long-term surveillance. A sizable number will develop pre-cancers and wind up undergoing biopsies, LEEP procedures and hysterectomies whether or not invasive cancer develops. These procedures are often painful and can impair fertility.
Good luck telling those patients about how harmless HPV infection is.
https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/questions-answers.html
I saw a a patient just last week for my Women's Health rotation (FNP program); 23 years old, sexually active, boyfriend has genital warts and they had not been using condoms. She got the full 3 shot series of Gardasil. She had a HPV screen six months ago when she found out about the GW, and wanted a repeat screen (she just dumped him) because they weren't using condoms.
We had a nice chat. She said she was glad she got the series. I am too; I have no doubt she'd be infected without it. We had a nice talk about condom use.
Seriously, this is not rocket science. Get the vaccine. My nephew gets his this month.
@NWO Reporter:
That was one of a number of studies I got when I searched on Google Scholar. It's clear your mind is welded shut and you won't accept evidence that refutes your misinformed beliefs.
I didn't say they were the only ones that mattered, just that they were the most dangerous.
Most people walk away from car crashes alive. Thousands still die every year from them.
Nope. You made the claim, you stump up the evidence. That's how it works here.
The research has been done, the results are in. The vaccine lowers cancer rates. Ignoring the evidence a la Donald Trump won't make it go away.
See comment about car crashes above. Every year, people die from chickenpox.
"Pap screening combined with loop electrosurgical excision procedures (LEEP) is almost 100% effective in preventing cervical cancer mortality ... HPV vaccines have not been demonstrated to be more effective or safer than Pap screening in the prevention of cervical cancer and Pap screening will still be required even in vaccinated women. ... In 2002 scientists concluded that HPV 16 and 18 were the central and independent cause of most cervical cancer. This conclusion was based on molecular technology. If HPV 16 and 18 infections are the central and independent cause of most cervical cancer then the incidence of HPV 16 and 18 should vary with the incidence and mortality of cervical cancer worldwide. This correlation does not exist. It is also observed that the majority of HPV 16/18 infections do not lead to cervical cancer. This indicates that other etiological or 'risk' factors are necessary for persistent HPV infection to progress to cancer. ... Clinical trials have only provided speculative benefits for the efficacy of HPV vaccines against cancer and the long-term risks of the vaccine have not been established..."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23758803
Ha! The grinning idiot quotes Wilyman.
Written by Judith Wilyman. Are you freaking joking?
It might be amusing to suggest searching for Wilyman's name on this blog. :-)
It also might be amusing to investigate why a number of countries, including Denmark, France, Spain, Japan and India have either placed moratoriums on the HPV vaccine, filed lawsuits, or called for independent investigations of its safety and efficacy.
Contrast with the US, where investigators with negative views on the vaccine, whether published in peer reviewed medical journals, blogs or websites, are berated; and "one less" commercials on TV market the vaccine directly to naive young teens.
http://kellybroganmd.com/new-gardasil/
And the idiocy from NWO Troll keeps on coming! More hilarity:
http://americanloons.blogspot.com/2015/07/1422-kelly-brogan.html
And, of course, that silly NWO Troll has still not figured out how to use the handy little search box at the top of this page:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/?s=brogan
Keep up the hilarity! It is fun to laugh at that silly troll.
LOL. As if this blog and the americanloons blog are trustworthy, while Dr. Broggan's is not. Heck--apparently not even peer reviewed papers published in medical journals are trustworthy if they challenge the big med status quo, according to the hypocritical standards applied here.
Nice try, but most people aren't naive enough to fall for that kind of nonsense anymore. :D
Since Chicken Pox only circulates in humans, over time, as more and more kids are vaccinated, the disease will have fewer and fewer hosts....once the available host community falls below the appropriate threshold, the disease will no longer be able to circulate.
Even with a reasonable vaccine failure rate, over time, it won't matter - since the chances of being exposed to the disease will drop dramatically.
NWO Troll, I have no reason to give any respect to anyone whose 'nym is a stupid decades old conspiracy theories based on lies. Especially in regards to the present political climate of alt-truth. You claiming to know who is more trustworthy is laughable.
Plus I despise those sadistic child haters who think children should get chicken pox because they can't bothered to get a shingles vaccine. I had to take care of a six month old baby with chicken pox who suffered quite a bit. Also, a big hint on your flagrant stupidity: the folks getting shingles are ones who actually got chicken pox as children.
"People?" You mean a very small percentage of nutbags who think they are important because they have Internet access?
Lawrence, it is hilarious that someone who is using a stale old silly conspiracy theory as a 'nym would actually type: "Nice try, but most people aren’t naive enough to fall for that kind of nonsense anymore."
Nonsense. Hah! I think a few irony meters have exploded.
I'm sure a lot of hypocrisy and flim-flam detection meters have exploded, that's for sure. :D
OMG, NWO. You are SUCH an idiot. Have you ever seen a girl with so many warts on her pudenda that she had problems urinating? I have. Have you ever had a LEEP or a cone biopsy? It's not a walk in the park. Thankfully, I've avoided those. And having a lot of them can impair cervical integrity, leaving you more prone to premature births. I get it. You hate vaccines so much that you also hate children and women.
I really wouldn't want to meet you in person. You must be the most unpleasant person, with all your hate.
Aw, you wouldn't want to meet me? I"m disappointed. I'm sure I could have learned a lot from you--like innovative online abuse and other techniques of emotional warfare; and nifty pharmaceutical sales tricks. :)
MI Dawn @234: This exactly. Just because in the developed world (assuming you have access to medical care) women are less likely to *die* of cervical cancer doesn't mean that there isn't a huge amount of suffering associated.
Here's how it can go: Up in the stirrups, get a questionable Pap smear. Go back for another. Still some bad looking cells. Biopsy (painful). LEEP (painful and you see smoke coming out of your body). And if all of that isn't enough, you might need a hysterectomy. Which is major abdominal surgery, which requires general anesthesia (which carries its own risks), and leaves you vulnerable to hernias, which might require more surgery to repair.
Not to mention that a total hysterectomy will absolutely cause infertility and menopause. And even if you're old enough to be done with your uterus and have already gone through menopause, you'll go through menopause *again* because your ovaries were still producing a trickle of estrogen. So more hot flashes and other symptoms.
So you're not dead, but that is a lot of suffering, and possibly was very, very expensive. All to avoid 3 shots.
Amanda @236: Actually, chickens do get vaccinated against pox. But not chickenpox (which is in the herpes family). Rather chickens (and other birds) can be vaccinated against canary pox, avian pox or fowl pox. These poxes are more closely related to smallpox than chickenpox. The Pox virus family is huge, species specific and fascinating. There are even pox viruses specific to insects.
Attempt at humor or Travis? It's so hard to tell these days.
And a link -http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2014/04/chickenpox-got-name/
Money quote
and sometimes it's not so hard to tell.
Let's move this up in the Google Rankings -
http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2017/02/the-fendlesworth-m…
Johnny: I'm going to take it as an attempt at humor, mostly because I love to share the amazing diversity of pox viruses. They're just so interesting, and potentially useful since the virus is big enough to be a vector for all kinds of vaccines.
When I was a kid, the biggest point of discussion among us was how great it was to get a week off school and eat ice cream and watch TV all day
Your anecdotal story about your childhood, if true, means nothing when it comes to assessing whether the alleged risk of a vaccine outweighs the benefits.
There is a risk window here.
"Matt Katz"? That's Travis J. Schwochert, perhaps better referred to as the "G-ddamn Finkelstein shit kid," of course (search on the surname, and all will be clear).
Yeah, he took advantage of my being in the operating room late to take care of a patient of one of my partners, who's out of town. So I wasn't paying attention for a while. Still, he's scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Please summarize, Narad.
And be sure to only include the parts where the varicella is available and recommended. Which pretty excludes most of this planet, including the UK.
Looks like Travis J. Schwochert from Endeavor, WI has found another e-mail address to use to get around being blocked from RI
Posting http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2017/02/the-fendlesworth-m…
because the more it's posted, the more it rises in the Google result rankings.
a number of countries, including Denmark, France, Spain, Japan and India have either placed moratoriums on the HPV vaccine, filed lawsuits, or called for independent investigations of its safety and efficacy.
After finding this to be a lie in the case of Denmark, I couldn't be arsed looking up the other countries.
Against whom are these countries filing lawsuits? I know there is a gaggle of loons within France who filed a lawsuit against the state, which is currently in the process of being laughed out of court.
On the topic of Brogan’s credentials, I am still wondering about the “Rudin Scholarship for Psychiatric Oncology” that she touts in all her biographies, and which has no existence outside her biographies. That is to say, she is a fabricating fraudster.
I thought Katz was put down a couple of days ago. I remember trying to send for the hammer, but I must have messed it up.
I think Travis is well suited for an "A4V" hobby.
NWO Troll: "Also, you are assuming the vaccine will prevent chickenpox infection. Yet vaccine failure rates as high as 44% have been observed."
Nirvana Fallacy. What an idiot. Also it is actually a good argument for community immunity. Vaccinate more, means less infections.
And less chance of shingles in later life.
For those of us had actually had chicken pox as children, we just need to remember to get a shingles vaccines. Only a sadistic child hater would prefer letting a child child suffer with dozens of open wounds (pox) instead of getting a simple painless vaccine.
I know it is painless because I have had a shingles vaccine. It sucked a whole lot less than when I had chicken pox (which I do remember, along with my second bout of mumps and the lovely time I had with dengue... then there was the time I went to bed and did not wake up for two weeks... which was either measles or influenza, no one knows because my mother died a couple of years later!).
Only a sadistic hater of children would think it was better for kids to actually get chicken pox than for full grown adults to avoid a painless shingles vaccine.
To add to what JustaTech said in #235 about the consequences of HPV Infection:
Actress Brooke Shields suffered from Cervical Cancer. Her cervix was permanently damaged by it, so her two daughters had to be delivered by Caesarian Section.
Still think three pricks with a needle aren't worth it?
Oh, I wish I could edit. Anyway, my point is made.. NWO Troll hates children and is too much of a chicken to get a shingles vaccines.
She is a child hating sadist who would rather surround herself with small children dealing with dozens of itchy open sores (pox) than get a painless vaccine. She wishes to impose cruelty on the young to protect herself. Oh, the irony... and the idiocy!
Dear NWO Troll, just get the shingles vaccine! Trust me, it does not hurt.
I know it is painless because I have had a shingles vaccine. It sucked a whole lot less than when I had chicken pox
It also sucks a whole lot less than the actual shingles.
FYI all re Gardasil: it's only two shots now:
https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/vaccine.html
NWO Reporter can enjoy continuing to monitor vigilantly her family's increased risk for HPV related cancers, and their increased risk of suffering shingles. At least my kids are dodging those bullets.
From the Deccan Chronicle:
HPV vaccination during pregnancy causes no harm to child.
There is an error in the first sentence, so read the full article.
Unfortunately my kids cannot avoid the shingles bullet, because they all got chicken pox a year before the varicella vaccine was available.
The youngest was only six months old, so has a highest chance of getting shingles the next few years while in her early 20s (especially when she is in graduate school).
Fortunately she and her older brother got the full HPV series. They will dodge that bullet!
And I still think anyone who thinks kids should suffer from full blown diseases instead of getting vaccinated is a child hating sadist.
Shay Simmons: "It also sucks a whole lot less than the actual shingles"
I remember chicken pox as being very painful with only a bit a respite as I made "chicks" from cotton balls and fabric with my mother. Then I had a six month old baby with it, and that was poor misery. Shingles must be terrible....
... and only a child hating sadist would think that kids go through that itchy painful torture because they can't be bothered to go to their local pharmacy to get a simple painless shingles vaccine!
NWO Troll campaign is to make kids suffer by being sick. That is just cruel and sadistic. And very stupid.
Die in a fire, Travis Schwochert.
Somebody summon the banhammer.
To summarize NWO Reporter's position, chickenpox is no big deal, but the shingles that follows along later is so bad* that adults need to be protected from it by exposure to poxy children, who will not suffer because chickenpox is no big deal, but will be at risk for shingles, which is so bad that ... ad infinitum.
* Shingles is that bad, which is why the shingles vaccine is good.
Have you ever noticed that Travis-the-Troll can't be arsed to sock someone like NWO Reporter? Of course, if he did, how would we tell the difference? I mean, there are so many loons out there that Orac allows to post here. IIRC, he's only permanently banned a few people because they were absolute slimeballs of society. (Not that I'm not including Travis-the-Troll in that group...)
I thought Katz was put down a couple of days ago. I remember trying to send for the hammer, but I must have messed it up.
I'd guess that one got mixed up with Luna. I mean, if one were so unfortunate as to be Travis J. Schwochert, what'd impersonation be without sockpuppeting to boot?
^ Blockquote fail.