Oh, hell. I actually used to like Smashing Pumpkins back in the 1990s. Unfortunately, its leader, Billy Corgan, has just revealed himself to be as medically ignorant as Jenny McCarthy in a recent blog post:
If you follow some of the links I have been supplying as of late, you'll notice many are focused on the propaganda build up to our day of reckoning with the Swine Flu virus. I say 'propaganda' because, in my heart, there is something mighty suspicious about declaring an emergency for something that has yet to show itself to be a grand pandemic. merican President Obama has declared a national emergency about this virus, which he in his own words said was, at this point, a preventative measure. So, why declare an emergency if there isn't one?
Note the conspiracy-mongering. Note the utter lack of understanding of what a pandemic is, although maybe the use of the term "grand pandemic" may be Billy's way of weaseling out of that criticism. In any case, there was a very simple reason why President Obama declared the emergency. Such a declaration gives Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius the authority to bypass federal rules when opening alternative care sites, such as offsite hospital centers at schools or community centers if hospitals seek permission. If the number of cases of flu overwhelms the medical system, this is a power that HHS needs. No conspiracy. No grab for power. The declaration also allows hospitals to bill for off site services that they can't normally bill for.
Billy then launches into the quack Miranda warning:
I am not a doctor, and I am in no way suggesting that you should follow any medical advice from me. What you do with your body, what you put into it, who you allow to love it or hate on it, is your business. I am more focused on the vibration that has us all so fearful: both for how the fear affects our thinking, and how, in our fear, we attract the worst, and, in conjunction with that, how those fears are used by others without integrity to try to create a power against Us to promote discomfort and dis-ease.
"Vibrations." Oh, no. I wonder if Corgan is into homeopathy. Whenever you hear talk of "vibrations" in a context like this, you know you're dealing with nothing but the finest grade-A woo and medical ignorance. If that's not enough, he uses the term "dis-ease." If the use of the term "vibration" isn't enough, whenever someone uses the term "dis-ease," you know with 99.9999999999999999% certainty that that person has drunk deeply of the quack Kool Aid. And so Billy has, including the conspiracy theories that the H1N1 virus is not naturally occurring:
I would suggest however that it is possible the virus is not a naturally occurring virus. I have read reports from people who say (as doctors) that there is evidence to suggest this virus was created by man; to call it Swine Flu is then a misnomer, as it really is Swine Flu plus some other stuff stitched together. These doctors said such genetic mutation was impossible in nature.
Bullshit, Billy. Bullshit. Such recombination of flu strains is not only very possible in nature; it happens all the time. That's how flu strains change so rapidly and why we need a new vaccine every year. Such ignorance is clearly the product of a University of Google cherry-picking "education." Only such ignorance can explain the next passage, full of the arrogance of ignorance combined with a mish mash of New Age woo, Christian belief, and sheer nonsense:
So you have a situation here where you can examine your own Mind-Body-Soul power staring in the face of Death itself. Assume this flu is the worst thing to ever hit this planet, worse than the beubonic plague of the Middle Ages, or worse than any war ever conjured up. Evil itself has come to wreak havoc on the planet. Assume, for the sake of argument, it is The End.
Well, where does that leave you? Do you quit work? Do you run away? Do you stand still and hope Death walks past you?
I for one will not be taking the vaccine. I do not trust those who make the vaccines, or the apperatus behind it all to push it on us thru fear. This is not judgment; it is a personal decision based on research, intuition, conversations with my doctor and my 'family'. If the virus comes to take me Home, that is between me and the Lord. I have put up some of these links to inspire the question in you, so that perhaps you can make a better decision for yourself. That is what holistic life is about: a willingness to look at all the facts or opinions.
Again, apparently Billy does his "research" on anti-vaccine crank sites and quack sites, if the links he's posted are any indication, links to articles like The Goal of Every H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccine: Immunotoxicity, Neurotoxicity and Sterility (which is so full of lies it deserves its own post to debunk) or The Threat of Mandatory Vaccinations. As for "holistic," Billy's "examination of the evidence" is anything but holistic. Clearly he's cherry picked the most outrageously anti-vaccine lies he can find from the Internet and blogosphere. Here's a hint, Billy: If you're being promoted by the anti-vaccine crank blog Age of Autism, you earn an EPIC FAIL when it comes to understanding vaccines and "dis-ease."
Sadly, I doubt that Billy Corgan is salvageable. His post is so full of New Age-y religious bilge that it would likely take a sustained deprogramming effort to have any hope of changing his mind. It's particularly telling that he does not accept comments (although comments are allowed at a news story reporting Billy's nonsense). So, what we have here is another celebrity idiot parroting anti-vaccine pseudoscience. Say hi to Jenny McCarthy, Brent Spiner, Jim Carrey, and all the others, Billy.
- Log in to post comments
Makes me glad I never liked the Smashing Pumpkins ;-)
This would be funny if these wackjobs were not being taken seriously. The effect is more insidious than the just the direct dissemination of misinformation. There has been created a background level of buzz that is sufficient to effect the thinking of people with considerably more than a GED. They don't know the specifics but just that there is something wrong with vaccines. The level of anti-vaccine thinking among people you would expect to know better is frightening.
The only good thing is that now with the shortages, I stand a chance of getting a shot for myself.
About six months ago rumors started that Corgan had 'found God' and recently he started his 'spiritual' website to share his thoughts.
At first I thought the rumors were mistaken. Surely the man who has done the most to demonstrate that there is indeed a fine line between genius and annoying egomaniac hasn't completely lost his ability to think.
And now I see this article and click of Billy's website
Oh dear.
Orac's right, he's gone too far. We've lost another one.
This is just more proof that absolutely no-one should be looking to celebrities for any kind of advice.
...except maybe how to break into showbusiness. I imagine "take pseudo-controversial positions on things you know nothing about and tell everyone the Man is out to get you and those who think like you" is on the checklist.
A relative of mine had extensive dealings with Mr. Corgan many years ago. He's always been an absolute asshole: Full of himself and difficult to work with. Although, these more recently ramblings seem to make him look more crazy than anything else.
My mind-body-soul-power says he's full of shite. I mean cmon, it sounds like he's been watching the power rangers for his slogans.
-The state will have the power to come into your home and incarcerate you for being unwilling to comply with a vaccination order.-
I can't help noticing that said news report is about government measures during a large outbreak and never actually mentions vaccination. It's more about quarantine. But then this is a guy who thinks we can genetically engineer viruses to...to...erm...give people flu...Frankly I can think of better ways for the illuminati-reptiloids to take over the world.
"I would suggest however that it is possible the virus is not a naturally occurring virus."
Well...to be fair it IS possible. Its possible that I could leave my house in the morning trip down the stairs, get mauled by a mountain lion, then run over by a bus, and finally then killed by a hit in the head with a meteor.
Its possible...which is why conspiracy theories abound...people equate possibility with likelihood.
Despite all my rage I am still just a moron in a cage.
"Its possible...which is why conspiracy theories abound...people equate possibility with likelihood."
My personal version is: possible is not the same as probable.
a-non, you rock, dude!
Yes, it's like the creationist insistence to "teach the controversy." W-T-F? Celebriots have the platform to turn any sicentific consensus into an optional opinion.
When I saw the post title line I thought it was really depressing, but reading what he actually wrote, I am slightly less bummed out. Not that what he wrote is any less crazy than the title made me think! But Corgan's anti-vax tangent appears to be the ancillary result of crank magnetism combined with a paranoid anti-establishment musician who is on (or was on) too many drugs.
In other words, he's not an anti-vax campaigner, he's just so "alternative" that he figures everything a person in a position of authority does must be a conspiracy. While the latter is kindof annoying, the former are the ones who make me really mad.
I can express why Corgan's views don't enrage me nearly as much as the anti-vaxers with a simple question: Do you really think that legions of terrified suburban first-time moms are going to forgo vaccinating their children because of Billy Corgan ranting about a government conspiracy?
You mean 'despite all his rage he's still just a twit on a stage'.
Awwww not Billy! Love the Smashing Pumpkins!
But I am not surprised in the least...
Someone who was/is involved with the likes of Courtney Love must have some form of serious brain illness.
My list of liked celebrities is getting shorter by the minute, if its not because they are supporting some power crazy underevolved monkey-like giant verruca president in South America, its because they are advocating for some sort of horrific Woo, how tragic!
You know what really makes me the most angry about these nutters? That there really are legitimate scientific and policy questions about influenza vaccination, but any time someone talks about them publicly it becomes a tool for the conspiracy fantasy (I'm promoting the use of this term - conspiracies are not theories, they are fantasies, please use it).
The questions are generally not about whether the vaccine is safe (it is), or whether it prevents the flue (it does), or where the flu comes from (evolution in the wild), but about whether it is the best use of resources, how effective it actually is in saving lives, and whether we have the best distribution strategy. But anything that might be used to criticize vaccination will be cherry picked and posted as a quote on an anti-vax website. This is the real problem with conspiracy fantasies - in an effort to combat them, legitimate scientific inquiry may be stifled for fear of providing these people with ammunition. Sad, really.
Aw, man.
I do like the Smashing Pumpkins. I'm just going to have to pretend even harder that Billy Corgan dropped off the face of the planet after Summersault 2000 now.
And I'll keep hoping that unlike some of the other celebrities who endorse the anti-vax party line, no one will take Corgan seriously.
You seem surprised that so many people are balking at the vaccines but do you read the scads of information for AND against them out there? How do you expect people to know what's truth and what is just conspiracy and paranoia? The common man can only make an educated guess...or should we all just accept everything the government says as gospel and take a number? You want to get people on the right side of the fence? Try refuting the misinformed, or challenge them with solid proof. If the general populace are acting like idiots, it's only because there are so many different angles, no one knows what to believe anymore.
Please check the previous entries of this blog and others on Science Blogs, such as Effect Measure, White Coat Underground, Aetiology and Terra Sigillata. Also that list to your left. Lots of refutation of the misinformed (and mendacious, I should add), as well as solid evidence of vaccine safety.
When the choice is between the NIH and Jenny McCarthy, I know which angle I'm supporting.
Here's the problem, more people voted on the American Idol finale last year than voted for Obama in the presidential election.
I trust most people can tell what is conspiracy and paranoia. For example, to think that thousands of employees of pharma companies are involved in an organized conspiracy is nonsense; especially once you consider that some proportion of those employees necessarily have autistic relatives and so forth. Furthermore, in 11 years there hasn't been one whistleblower. Not a single one. What does that tell you?
You can never know the absolute truth about anything, but not all information is equally valid. The fact that you have pro and con positions does not mean that both positions have equivalent merit.
There have been very high profile and well documented analyses of all the available information by educated non-scientists, with the help of expert opinions. I'm talking about the Omnibus Autism Proceedings (the legal ass-kicking of the century in my view.)
It's not like because there are two positions it's impossible to come up with a judgment one way or another.
That's exactly what blogs like this try to do.
Why do you waste your time talking about Billy Corgan?
I know, I know, you don't give a rat's ass about what I think about how you run this blog and you won't be told what to write about and you're more likely to say "white" if I say "black."
Again.
You're an incredibly powerful and prolific writer, a solid scientist, a convincing polemicist and you could be so good at decreasing the animosity instead of constantly trying to polarize.
Please?
Jay
No.
What you call "constantly trying to polarize," I call "calling out idiots promoting dangerous pseudoscience."
Everybody relax, its all okay. As soon as Billy formed Zwan, it was clear nobody would ever take him seriously again!
OK.
As the cliche goes: "That's how you sell newspapers."
You call it "calling out idiots promoting dangerous pseudoscience."
I call it "insulting, polarizing and alienating people with whom you could have a civil conversation if you tried."
I get it.
Best,
Jay
@21, Jay Gordon: Why is talking about Billy Corgan a waste of Orac's time? The problem is that folks like Corgan have an audience, and some that audience is going to read his thoughts on vaccines and think, "Hey, this makes a lot of sense."
It's not a waste of time for the medical community and the blogosphere to engage celebrity anti-vaxxers in this way, because the impact they have is not negligible. If no one were listening to folks like Corgan, McCaarthy, Carrey, etc., it WOULD be a waste of time to talk about them. But sadly, that is not the case.
Jay,
Not everyone is as starstruck as you are:
Please note I'm not bashing Cindy here. I know she's actually bright.
I don't know, I think Jay Gordon might have a point. Corgan may be an idiot, but there are indeed bigger fish to fry. For example, Orac could spend more time exposing and humiliating anti-vax doctors who do things like use their membership in the AAP to try to give their ignorant ramblings and air of authority...
That is way better, Katharine. I'm out of practice when it comes to snark, I suppose.
You mean a 'civil conversation' as in being polite and agreeable to one another, finding common ground, trying to build a moderate synthesis midway between two opposing points of view? Not going to happen. What sort of middle ground is there between 2+2=4 and 2+2=5? These peoples' fears are irrational and without foundation; one can sympathize with them, and understand how they've been lied to, but there is no credibility whatsoever to the anti-vaccine paranoia, and making concessions to those fears (ie, the removal of thiomersal from US vaccines) only go to 'prove' to frightened people that there really is a problem there.
Besides, this:
is just sheer, unadulterated, nihilistic crazy. If Billy had gone this far into the deep end back in the 90s, he'd have been one of the Heaven's Gate cultists.
Hi there,
I recently got into a debate with someone who made some anti-vaccination claims and I've created a fairly large essay of sorts documenting the claims and the science with discredits them. In the end, the person I debated actually thanked me (but I don't know that I necessarily convinced him).
Hopefully this is something that can contribute to the ongoing debate (about something that really doesn't have any *actual* science controversy):
http://quay.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/a-response-to-some-vaccination-con…
I cite all of my sources, which I wish more people in the anti-vaccination camp would do.
You know, I was thinking about RI last night at work, and it suddenly hit me: One of the big weapons that the Woo-meisters have that we don't is a good, ol' fashioned Conspiracy Theory. Yes, we have facts and science and reason and logic, but that only goes so far.
So, here's my suggestion:
Jennie and Suzanne and all the other woo-meisters really don't want you to get your children vaccinated because when The Really Big Government Created Plague That We're All Waiting For But Never Comes (TRBGCPTWAWFBNC), you'll be so scared of vaccinations that you'll refuse to protect yourself and your family. Only Jennie and Suzanne and Oprah and Jim and will get the vaccinations and the rest of us will die or become mindless slaves and they'll take over the planet. That's also why Suzanne Somers doesn't want you to get your cancer treated.
And think about why they're so anti-science. I mean, to be anti-science is to be anti-American if you think about it. After all, we put a man on the moon, we invented the light bulb, the phonograph, the iPod, the atomic bomb, and Silly String, right?
So not only are the folks at AoA anti-American, they want to either kill you or turn your children into mindless slaves. Oh, and they hate kittens.
Hey, facts and science and reason and logic don't seem to be reaching these people. Maybe it's time to step through the looking glass and fight them on their own turf.
Just a thought.
That is actually a good point as Corgan is an out right loony who will only be listened to by idiots, but doctors should know better and can use their position of authority to do irepearable damage.
Dr. Jay,
Complaints about "tone" are a weapon used by people in positions of respect or authority to silence their critics.
You did not answer my question in another thread: how do your recommendations regarding the H1N1 vaccine differ from the CDC recommendations? Be specific please.
What is the deal with this Spanish nun YouTube vide - Teresa Forcades and her anti-H1N1 screed? It's rolling through the net like Michael Moore at an all you can eat buffet.
The thing that amazes me about conspiracy theories is that they give the federal government so much more power and ability to operate across agencies, and branches of government than exists in the real world. I work in the federal government and I can tell you, we just aren't that organized.
Citizen Deux, indeed, I would love to know Dr. Jay's recommendations about the H1N1 vaccine as compared to the CDC. I just got mine (about 30 min ago) and it would have been nice to have that information earlier.
Hey, don't thank me! Thank Jay Gordon, MD, FAAP (and anti-vax nut) for the suggestion.
Billy Corgan has never been the brightest crayon in the box so I can't say I'm surprised. Though I do have to point out that it could've been worse and his links may ave lead to David Icke and the lizard people.
Just saying...
I find it particularly amusing how many people simultaneously believe in such conspiracy theories AND consider the government to be made up of mindless incompetent morons who can't do anything right!
Except, apparently, for engaging in massively complex and far-reaching conspiracies involving thousands of people, with such impressive skill that no trace of it has yet been found.
Except that you can find out all about it in 30 seconds on Google.
mad the swine wrote:
2+2=4.5, obviously! Geez, was that so hard?
You really ought to start thinking outside the box, Dave. Everybody who knows anything understands that 2+2 equals a bowl of tomato soup.
That's just what you want us to believe, you Alluminati Reptiod.
The saddest part is that people who actually want the vaccine but haven't had access to it are getting sick, and some are dying, while the anti-vax cretins somehow manage to keep breathing.
Proof, incontrovertible, of the nonexistence of any sort of sane, loving god/dess/es.
Seriously, anybody listens to this guy? Billy Corgan looks like he eats babies! ( Note: I am not saying that he actually does eat babies, or that anyone thinks this.) Not the person I would look to for medical information. BBQ sauce, maybe.
I thought that term sounded familiar. Turns out that the last time you blogged on the term "dis-ease" it gave me a serious twinge of nostalgia. And now Billy Corgan uses it in combination with "vibrations"?
That's heavy, man.
Say, did you know we have medical marijuana in Colorado now?
Don't know what made me think of that.
What was I saying?
Wow thanks for the link jre. I was really curious about "dis-ease". Now I'm per-turbed(?)
The last time I encountered the phrase "dis-ease" was in a book by radical-feminist-kinda-sorta-Pagan Mary Daly. And (IIRC) she made a LOT more sense than Corgan does.
And as usual, Dr. Jay's "response" to all this is just as dissembling, dishonest, and totally beside the point as he always is. Corgan's screed shows how stupid the anti-vaxxers' position really is, and Dr. Jay knows he can't defend it; so he accuses us of "polarizing" instead. Just like all those creationist liars who cry about "incivility" when their lies get exposed and debunked.
Dammit Billy!
You're a muso. You should actually understand a thing or two about vibrations.
And does anybody know why Jay feels the need to put his non-science degree and board certification after his name in every single post he makes (sometimes twice)?
LibraryGuy @ 31, thank you. Thank you very much. Seriously. You had me laughing out loud and I really needed that as clinic is sucking large horny toads today and I haven't seen a single patient.
Dr. Gordon, you might gain some credibility if you take JB Handley and the other people at AoA and Generation Rescue to task for their uncivil tone. See Handley's response to Amy Wallace's excellent Wired article as an example.
The more I listen to the Smashing Pumpkins the more I don't like them. This was even before Billy Corgan did a half-gainer off the deep end.
Billy Corgan is a true legend. He realizes the science has spoken,some thimerosal containing vaccines can cause severe brain damage.
The Hannah Poling case is smoking gun evidence Vaccines can cause Autism, she was totally healthy and the courts ruled vaccines triggered her autism. Her "mitochondria" disorder caused no symptoms and could easily be an effect of autism. The government admitted vaccines cause Autism.
Monkeys injected with The Thimerosal containing hepatitis b vaccine get brain damaged while controls do not.
3 peer reviewed studies have shown Urinary porphyrins in Autistic patients consistent with only mercury poisoning not seen in controls. The science has spoken, vaccines cause brain damage in some cases, the science has spoken.
Delayed Acquisition of Neonatal Reflexes in Newborn Primates Receiving a Thimerosal-Containing Hepatitis B Vaccine: Influence of Gestational Age and Birth Weight.
Hewitson L, Houser LA, Stott C, Sackett G, Tomko JL, Atwood D, Blue L, White ER and Wakefield AJ.
Porphyrinuria in childhood autistic disorder: implications for environmental toxicity.Nataf R, Skorupka C, Amet L, Lam A, Springbett A, Lathe R.
Laboratoire Philippe Auguste, Paris, France.
An Investigation of Porphyrinuria in Australian Children with Autism
Authors: David W. Austin a; Kerrie Shandley a
Affiliation: a Swinburne Autism Bio-Research Initiative (SABRI), Faculty of Life and Social Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia
Neurotox Res. 2006 Aug;10(1):57-64.
A prospective assessment of porphyrins in autistic disorders: a potential marker for heavy metal exposure.
Geier DA, Geier MR.
The Institute for Chronic Illnesses, Silver Spring, MD 20905, USA.
Cooler, you haven't told us yet if you believe that man really landed on the moon.
Jre, Have you ever had a girlfriend loser? If you provide me evidence you've ever had a girlfriend that wasn't a toad I'll answer your moon question.
Hi Dr. Jay! I regret that Orac has passed you over yet again to call out another antivaxer.
So you don't feel too deprived of attention, how about answering me, titmouse and Prometheus who've been asking you to explain what your guidelines are on recommending H1N1 vaccine to your patients, how they differ from the CDC's recommendations for high risk patients and how you arrived at your own guidelines.
Specifically, can you explain how you apparently changed your mind and endorse discussing H1N1 vaccination with "higher risk" patients, when you've previously stated on your website that only children with "extraordinary" risk factors would qualify for immunization by you - and that you anticipate giving no H1N1 vaccinations at all this year?
What consitutes sufficient risk in your view for you to recommend H1N1 immunization? Do you have any patients with asthma, cystic fibrosis or immune disorders that your colleagues in the AAP would agree are at considerable risk? Do you have any patients on steroids who have depressed immunity as a result and would be more prone to contracting H1N1? Or do you confine your practice to the well?
We'd really appreciate substantive answers to these questions, instead of the random drive-by potshots that currently characterize your postings.
@cooler - You know my favorite thing about the monkey study? They talk about results being "significant" with n = 13. Don't know if you've ever taken a statistics class, but a sample size of 13 means pretty much nothing is significant.
As to the urine study, heavy metal exposure comes from a lot of places, not just one that remains in the body a very short time like the mercury in Thimerosal, but also the kind of mercury that stays much longer in the body and actually causes neurological damage - the kind found in power plant emissions, all sorts of fish - especially tuna, etc. And then theres lead, found not just in paint, but also in most soil, and therefore in some vegetables.
So, have the people blaming vaccines for autism been feeding their kids tuna fish? How about vegetable grown in lead contaminated soil? Much more likely sources for much higher levels of more dangerous heavy metal exposure than vaccines.
@54 Have you read the Durban Declaration about HIV? They cite an SIV study that only had 2 monkeys and no controls, yet it was still published in Nature and signed by 5,000 scientists, you'd have to throw the declaration out based on the standard you imply.
As far as the kids in the poryphrins study being exposed to other forms of mercury, this needs to be explored, the mercury lovers are saying Mercury has nothing to autism period, and its all just a result of an expanded defintion of autism. If mercury or Thimerosal had nothing to do with autism than the urinary poryphrins would be the same as controls, they were not, they were dramtically increased in Autistic patients.
Answer some goddamn questions for once, Dr. Jay, you smarmy little asshole.
Either that, or come over to my place so I can cough in your face, putz. I figure I got off fairly lightly with this H1N1 thing so far (being as I know someone in the hospital who's been coughing up blood!), and I have still been totally miserable for almost a week now.
Instead of condescendingly trying to explain to us that you're smarter and more observant than the entire scientific establishment, why don't you just pony up with some answers, huh? And yes, I'm being rude. I've got bronchitis, I've been hurling from the heels for most of a week, and I'm bored off my ass; I'm not feeling particularly charitable to begin with, and nothing gets under my skin faster than a smug idiot.
You are objectively pro-misery, and don't even know it, so you need a little incivility thrown at you, frankly.
@cooler: Did they match cases and controls for diet, urbanicity, pica and creatinine differences between autistics and non-autistics? Did they actually determine that the porphyrin pattern is only seen in mercury poisoning? Why doesn't this result show up in studies of actual mercury burden, like the latest MIND study on this?
No wonder his bandmates were driven to opiate abuse. They were trying to catch up with his endogenous opioid levels.
A few weeks ago I found out Mathew Bellamy from Muse is a 9/11 troofer. Now Billy Corgan, the leader of my favourite 90's band (and, IMHO one of the best pop bands in recent decades) is an anti-vax wingnut. Sigh....
Just goes to show that being a good musician is in no way correlated with being a good person.
@57 The mind study just looked at the blood not tissues where toxicity takes place, poryphrins are specific for mercury and can tell you how much was poisoning took place in the tissues.
These studies are smoking gun evidence that autistics are mercury posoined, most likely by thimerosal, because most kids don't eat fish, But I would support a new study that controls for all confounders. Not afraid of new research like you guys are. Cant believe they still give mercury laced flu shots to pregnant women.......sad.
i don't think exposure to heavy metal is bad. i don't have any studies to back up my opinion, but i think Black Sabbath is pretty good. so is Judas Priest.
Billy's oblivious. "Bored by the chore of
saving face", hmmm?
As I recall, that was your answer last time. I'm putting you down as a "No."
Next question: do reptile people walk among us?
Are you serious, cooler? It's well known that children eat fish (including autistic children) and that fish consumption can be observed in blood mercury levels, unlike thimerosal, which clears out rather quickly.
As a smashing pumpkins fan, I say, don't listen to a word Bill Corgan says. He's very well known as a egotistical jerk. He is a damn good musician, but it stops there. There are many rumors of why the Pumpkins broke up in the first place, most centering around Billy's overly "I can do anything better than you" attitude towards other band mates.
Ah, Joseph. Your comment, though well-intentioned, indicates that you did not get the memo. Cooler is a notoriously paranoid troll, and is to be either ignored or treated with contemptuous mockery. But, just this once, let's treat his silly-assed comment as if it meant something. Children, as you have pointed out, do eat fish. In fact, studies of children in the Faroe and Seychelles islands who eat a lot of fish were the basis of FDA's recommendations regarding acceptable exposure levels for methylmercury.
Here endeth the reality-based commentary.
We now return you to our regularly scheduled program of snark and raillery.
@Cooler. Hmmm I remember growing up and Tuna was one of my favorites. Tuna sandwiches and tuna casserole. Or maybe I just think that because My Reptilian Overlords put Mind Controlling Toxins in my Flu shot creating false memories...
I haven't read the thread yet, but I wanted to preliminarily say:
gah.
First the Foo Fighters come out as AIDS denialists. Now Billy Corgan hates vaccines.
gah.
I still love all their records. Great musicianship and songwriting. No preposterous claims being made in the songs.
But offstage, you guys, get your heads of your asses. Please.
Joseph, cooler is manifestly delusional, bordering on the psychotic. He's useful only as an example to others, there's no point engaging him in any way.
Been there, done that.
Again to my detractors snerd and jre etc. Please provide any evidence that you've ever had a girlfriend that wasn't a 400 pound toad. Thank you.
I was talking about infants usually don't eat fish, regardless are you saying that Autism patients are mercury poisoned due to fish? Thats why their poryphrins are elevated? Plausible, then the last thing they needed was further mercury poisoning when they were directly injected with Thimerosal, its also more plausible that it was the Thimerosal alone that poisoned them, since there is no evidence they ate fish. Perhaps further studies can elucidate this! I can't wait!
Snerd, still waiting for evidence you have ever had a girlfriend. Thanks.
Couple of points regarding cooler's diatribe:
- Urinary porphyrins can be altered by a huge list of factors, including biochemical disorders, other acute and chronic illnesses, drugs, toxicity from heavy metals and other agents, time of day the test is taken, and even dietary alterations. There is a characteristic pattern of porphyrin excretion seen in mercury poisoning, but it clears quickly once exposure stops. The pattern is not specific for mercury, either, as far as I know. So it's not a "smoking gun" for mercury poisoning.
- Even if everything cooler says is true, it still doesn't explain why these results are appearing in autistic children years after ethyl mercury was taken out of vaccines.
No mcneely, the pattern for mercury poisonining is specific for mercury toxicity and does not go away, just read the studies I posted. Dr. Geier in his study was able to bring the poryphrin values back to normal when he chelated the high poryphrin mercury poisoned patients.
The Geier study the median age was 9 and median birth age was 1997, so they were exposed to heavy doses of Thimerosal. The study was done in 2005-2006. Nice try mcneely saying they were born later without even reading the paper.
http://www.usautism.org/PDF_files_newsletters/A_Prospective_Study_of_Me…
Mr. Not So Cool:
Taking the 'lol what a nerd' angle has three problems:
1) Nerdy is not a bad thing. Much of the world runs on us.
2) Many nerds have significant others.
3) I suspect you are just taking that tack because you realize you've been outsmarted.
I see cooler's debate skills have never progressed beyond the high-school freshman level.
In fact, I think it's hilarious when people trot out the 'lol what a nerd' attempt to snipe at people, because they do the job of calling themselves dumbasses so I don't have to call them a dumbass.
jre:
snerd:
Exactly. Please, folks... do not feed the troll.
@katherine Outsmarted where? I just respond to personal insults with the truth that's all. Although most "nerds" here pretend to be smart when they are not, they are really just non-thinking personality-less morons who are mindless technicians for the CDC. Being a true genius and great scientist does involve having some personality and charisma, like Duesberg and Kary Mullis.
Duesberg was the guy everyone wanted to be around and have beers with cause he had brains, personality and could think for himself, whereas the people who attack me are just straight up rejects with no personalities. "Nerds" that want to be smart but are not, which is why I demand any evidence that they've ever had a decent girlfriend. Thank you.
Wow, cooler, you,ve managed to make an ad-hominim attack, the favorite fallback of those who can't make their case with evidence!
@databaseerror
What are you talking about? I just initially posted with several experiments and mentioned the Hannah Poling case and I was called a nutjob by several people. Then when I respond I'm the bad guy? Man go back and read the thread and see who started the personal insults. Just cause my comebacks strike such a nerve doesn't mean I started it! It's all good fun though, I'm still waiting for the people who attacked me if they have any evidence that they have ever had a girlfriend that wasn't a toad..........
Anybody who dredges up already disproven "facts" and then resorts to name calling when called out on that deserves to be ridiculed.
@databaseerror
Any evidence you've ever had a girlfriend? Did you even read the 3 studies on poryphrins I posted, examine the Hannah Poling case, its not like you have a hot date to look forward to any time in the next 100 years.............(just collapsed in complete laughter)
@jj
The Illuminati are commanding me to run
out to the grocery to buy a couple cans
of store-brand tuna, a box of Creamettes
elbow macaroni, some American processed
cheese food slices and a can of Campbell's
cream of mushroom soup. The Taste of Lent
is calling, as visions of sitting at the
dinner table, methodically picking out
the infinitesimal bits of mushroom, flash
before my very eyes!
Nah, it's got to be teh t0xxinz from the
flu shot I had in September causing
regression to childhood memories...
1. "Nerds" are candy.
2. Anyone who posts on a science blog
under a non-gender-specific handle is
male.
3. "Evidence of having a decent girlfriend"
is meaningless, if not patently ridiculous.
4. cooler advocates for needless
suffering from preventable diseases and
unscientific misinformation pertaining to
autism.
QED.
Not-So-Cool, the stupidity about asking people about whether they've had a significant other makes you look like a boob and distracts from the actual conversation.
I would argue you don't have much of a personality yourself; you seem to do nothing but parrot already-disproven canards.
Exactly that is why no one can handle my science either. The Hannah poling case clearly proves vaccines cause Autism. Nuerotoxicology 2006 Hewitson et al prove that the Thimerosal containing hepatitis b vaccine when injected into monkeys causes brain damage not seen in controls. The debate is over the science has spoken. Even you idol Sanjay Gupta conceded the Poling case on CNN.
BTW Katherine, have you ever had a boyfriend? (just collapsed in complete laughter)
Okay, I think we all know who cooler is working for. We all know where he'll be when The Really Big Government Created Plague That We're All Waiting For But Never Comes comes. Walking out of the secret vaccination chambers, laughing at all the anti-vaxers as they're turned into mindless slaves.
Finally, he'll get a real girlfriend!
One question though: cooler, why do you hate kittens?
Trolls tend to go away if you ignore them.
Folks, I won't advise, like Chris, that you ignore the troll completely. What I would advise is remembering that effort spent trying to educate him is wasted.
His comments may still be useful: just like snopes.com, they assemble just about every half-baked rumor, just about every crack-pipe paranoid fantasy, just about every miserably twisted bit of misinformation, all into one place where it's easy to go through it all and provide refutation for all the false claims and shoddy logic. The difference is of course that cooler assembles all that trash under the delusion that it's treasure, but still, it's all in one place, making it an excellent opportunity to educate those who might have been previously misled into believing some of the things cooler believes but who are, unlike cooler, salvageable.
BTW, cooler? You should really keep using that "Oh, yeah! Well, you don't have a girlfriend *and* she's a 400-pound toad!" line. Seriously. Keep up the good work. You really are letting the world know exactly what brilliant logicians the anti-vaccinationists have in their corner.
A-yep.
@cooler - If you read my link (http://quay.wordpress.com/#Claim_3_Mitochondrial_dysfunct) you'll see that there are quite a bit of questions about the ethics and credibility of Mark Geier in general, especially with regard to his autisma research.
Additionally, the AAP, the CDC etc truly consider the Poling case to be an edge case (though of course you'd never be convinced of that).
Mr. Feldspar
Excellent post. The science has spoken in the Hannah Poling case and when monkeys were injected with Hepatitis B thimerosal vaccines and got brain damaged while controls do not. Not to mention the 3 studies that show autistic kids have abnormal poryphrins consistent with mercury poisoning while controls don't, and this abnormal pattern goes away with chelation. All references provided above.
The evidence is overwhelming. Thank you it was fun having this debate, buy since I've won what is the point? No one can handle my power, and no one that insults me can provide evidence they have ever had a decent looking girl or boyfriend. Thank you. The science has spoken.
But why do you hate kittens?
The trolls/morons sound worse than usual today. Hopefully it's desperation on their part. More likely, it's something benign like indigestion.
@bob,
It's just cooler. You can have fun with him, or you can just ignore him like most people do.
Are they republican kittens?
@ Interrobang "Answer some goddamn questions for once, Dr. Jay, you smarmy little asshole."
You are an embarrassment to the others here, Interrobang. I have been clear in my answers:
Children with asthma, diabetes, compromised immune systems, cardiovascular disease and perhaps other illnesses should consult with the specialists taking care of their conditions and I would certainly defer when those specialists recommend getting seasonal or H1N1 flu vaccine.
I don't think it's a great vaccine or a proven-safe vaccine. Just a vaccine whose benefits might outweigh the known or unknown risks for these children.
Orac, if someone came into my "house" and spoke to another person the way Interro speaks, I would kick them to the curb. You are truly an ineffectual blog host in that regard.
@Joseph C: You've pulled a years-old tongue-in-cheek joke out of context. It'd be funnier if you knew me or if you had a sense of humor.
@Travis: Have I answered your question? Prometheus, Bacon, Titmouse, is my position clear?
There are many situations which warrant certain types of vaccines. The current childhood vaccine schedule and flu vaccine recommendations are not as safe as they could be.
@ antipodean: My "MD" is regarded as a "science degree" in most circles and the initials FAAP are part of the name I use on Twitter and elsewhere. You can just call me . . . Jay
Jay
"No one can handle my power, and no one that insults me can provide evidence they have ever had a decent looking girl or boyfriend."
Wow. Anybody else hear that in the voice of the brain monsters in the Futurama episode: "The Day The Earth Stood Stupid"?
"The Big Brain am winning again! I am the greetest! Mwa-ha-haa! Now I am leaving Earth for no raisin!"
You're right Joseph C. It's just cooler to have fun with cooler.
Dr. Jay:
All you have to do is to provide evidence to support that statement. Something more that "your experience."
Otherwise you are just whistling into the wind. Make a difference, provide real data.
Just a thought: Billy Corgan does seem to be a massive drama queen. When he reformed the group, he took back the one guy who had actually *killed* someone (an incident involving a drug overdose) and went out of his way to alienate D'arcy Wretzky, losing any chance of getting James Iha back in the process.
But I gotta admit, the only song by them that I really like is "1979", which is so badly sung that it makes "Louie Louie" look like a Mutt Lange production.
Wait, Dr. Jay... did you just Twitter that four of the vulnerable members of you family were vaccinated for H1N1?
Come on, tell us what you really think! Not what your sycophants think you should say!
Do you think that pregnant women and young children should get the H1N1 vaccine?
Billy Corgan's Twitter feed is just as loony as his blog. It's full of mindless religious blather. Guess that's not surprising considering that he's always been a narcissist with a God complex. I highly doubt that many of his original fans are interested in following that bullshit.
Good luck with your "career" resurrection Billy, and I hope you shake lots of your new anti-vaxxer fans' germy hands at your next Meat n Greet!
Makes me sad that I used to like the smashing pumpkins... :'(
Roger Daltry, the Foo Fighters and now this? It's a good thing I pick my music collection based on liking the music and not the band members, otherwise I'd be sitting in silence...
Hannah Polling had autism? That's news to me. She had something which caused similar effects to autism (and autism is a pretty loose definition anyway).
However thats like saying the flu virus also causes colds because there is some overlap of symptoms.
Of course it was *supposed* to be funny. But you're a doctor and we all know how much doctors suck at comedy.
It was still illustrative of my point: You're star struck and you like the attention you get from being controversial.
At the same time, you don't want to deal with the bummer side of being controversial: You're going to piss people off.
@cooler - I'll reply one last time, then since you will ignore everything I write, as you already have, and claim that I "can't handle your science" I'll just assume that I've said enough to counter the effects of your ignorance on other readers.
Interesting that you argue that it's probably not fish doing the poisoning since infants don't eat fish. Later you remind us that the median age of those in the study is 9. Nine year olds eat tuna fish. I never did, not a fan, but my 3 year old will be having it next Wednesday at day care. Apparently, tuna fish has long been very popular with small children, and prior to warnings about mercury in it, it was commonly one of the first truly solid foods that infants ate. It is one of the major sources of environmental mercury, but there are many others (breathing the air too near a power plant, breast milk of a mother who eats tuna or other large predatory fish just to name a couple).
Now, as to the Poling case, in science a single case doesn't prove anything. I'm not familiar with this case, but I'm not going to waste my time reading it to find the flaws because I already know that real science does not support your conclusion.
On to monkeys. The monkey experiment proves nothing. I'm not familiar with the AIDS study you mention, but it is irrelevant, one study with a sample size of 13 doesn't prove anything in science either. It provides results that warrant further study. Next another team of researchers needs to study the same effect in a well designed, properly blinded study (which I can only hope the first one was, since the for profit world of academic publishing will only let me read the abstract). The new study should use say, 200 monkeys instead of 13. They should be divided into four groups, one that gets the vaccine with thimerosal, one that gets vaccine without thimerosal, one that gets thimerosal without vaccine, and one that gets saline solution. Now if the thimerosal groups but not the others still have delayed development in some areas (that's what they claim to have found by the way, developmental delays, not brain damage) then we can begin to have some confidence in those results. Preferably some other teams should do the study as well, and if they get the same results, then we could say with confidence that monkeys that receive thimerosal had developmental delays. We cannot say that because we don't have enough data points or enough corroborating studies. Finally, even then we have not proved anything about autism. Next we would need to follow the monkeys to maturity and see if they behaved differently from other monkeys or had trouble relative to other monkeys on tests of monkey intelligence. If they did, across multiple studies with large numbers of monkeys, only then could we say with confidence that injection with thimerosal was associated with long term mental disabilities in monkeys. I can only assume that this would be generalizable to humans based on biological similarity (since we're not anywhere near that point in the research, I'll leave that to the monkey biology experts). Finally, even if we were to reach this level of confidence with our results, we still would not have proved anything at all regarding autism, because the monkeys don't have autism.
Given that extensive well designed studies have found no danger related to thimerosal, and given that thimerosal contains ethyl mercury, which does not linger in the body, as opposed to the methyl mercury found in tuna, which does linger in the body and cause damage, and given that thimerosal has been removed from the majority of vaccines yet the increase in autism rates continues unchanged, there is every reason to believe that it vaccines are safe, and that three studies (two of which can't say anything about thimerosal, and the first of which can't say anything about autism) and one poor and misinterpreted court decision do not "prove" anything at all.
Now, since I have never once made a personal attack, please feel free to attack me as never having had a girlfriend and continue your fallacious reasoning. I assume that any interested parties can see that you are not worth listening to.
Gus out.
I read cooler's pseudo-scholarly message, and I noticed the mention of a "laboratoire Philippe Auguste" in Paris. What's this? Does it exist?
It turns out that it does. They have a website:
http://www.labbio.net/
I'm afraid I'm not qualified enough here, but they seem to promote a puzzling mix of lab research and woo.
Their page on autism doens't work. But they have a booklet:
http://www.labbio.net/docs/en/autism_booklet.pdf
It's full of references about gluten intolerance, brain inflammation, and of course mercury and heavy metal poisoning. I'd love to hear someone with the adequate scientific expertise tell me whether they're kooks, mad scientists, or anything else.
Children with asthma, diabetes, compromised immune systems, cardiovascular disease and perhaps other illnesses should consult with the specialists taking care of their conditions and I would certainly defer when those specialists recommend getting seasonal or H1N1 flu vaccine.
Now that you've flat-out admitted that your advice is useless and irrelevant, when are you going to just shut the fuck up?
Orac, if someone came into my "house" and spoke to another person the way Interro speaks, I would kick them to the curb.
And if you came into my house and spewed the obscurantist lies you're spewing here, I'd kick you to the curb. You're in no position to lecture the owner of this blog about manners. You are, in fact, deliberately bringing all this incivility on yourself, just like the creationists: say stupid things until people call you stupid, lie until people call you a liar, and then start crying about all the name-calling.
The current childhood vaccine schedule and flu vaccine recommendations are not as safe as they could be.
Nothing is EVER "as safe" as some naive bubblehead can imagine it "can be." If that's the meat of your objections, than you have no case. If vaccinations "can be" safer than they are, I'm quite sure we'll be able to make them safer over time, just as medical science has made all of its remedies safer, by large and small improvements. With no help from the emotional fear-mongers.
I don't recommend vaccination of healthy pregnant women and healthy children except under the circumstances listed above.
Jay
I stopped reading at "The Geier study." Seriously, that's a rule in autism science discussions.
Thank you Dr Gordon. My OB and pediatrician also do not recommend that I get vaccinated for H1N1. I am 3mos pregnant, healthy, young, lean and active, and I have had all my immunizations as needed in my lifetime (never had flu shot though and never been out with the flu either). I am not high risk. There is absolutely no reason to expose a fetus to any more than we already encounter daily.
@titmouse
Where was that study you quoted recently regarding H1N1 vaccine and pregnant women?
@gus Snarp
Your Demand for 200 monkeys is pretty crazy and unethical. Popper only used 2 monkeys and no controls to prove polio is caused by a virus, Barry Marshall had 1 person (Himself) and won a Nobel for proving bacteria causes Ulcers, The Durban declaration signed by 5,000 scientists had an SIV study that only had 2 monkeys and no controls, so you've gone of the deep end demanding 200 monkeys.
Secondly the Brubacher monkey study provides evidence that Ethlymercury stays in the tissues longer than methylymercury. You're not familiar with the Hannah Poling case where the government conceded vaccines caused Hannah's autism? That's sad. Again no one here can handle my arguments which is why they resort to personal attacks. No one can handle my power.
Why can't I just let it go? Sorry, for this kind of study 13 treatment monkeys and 3 (or is it 4 or 7?) controls is not enough to come up with any kind of confidence in the conclusion. 200 monkeys unethical? Maybe. But 13 treatment cases in this kind of study is pretty much worthless. Popper (or was it Landsteiner) didn't prove squat, inspite of the fact that their experiment was entirely different from this one, they were able to provide some confirmation that bacteria were not the cause of the disease, but their research was confirmed by other scientists, that's what gets us to proof.
The Popper experiment is still used in textbooks today as proof polio is caused by a virus, again 2 monkeys were used and no controls. You claim that further experiments that used 200 or so monkeys further proved further proved the polio/virus hypothesis, I am not aware of these studies, I'm not saying they don't exist, but can you describe those experiments?
The Lansteiner/Popper experiment is not proof. It was an initial discovery, but it was corroborated by other studies. Lots of people are famous for discovering things that other people actually proved later through better experiments. It's the initial discoverer who often gets the credit. I said nothing about numbers of monkeys related to these studies. Stop putting words in my mouth. I also said the Landstener/Popper study was not even remotely like the 13 monkey thimerosal study in character.
No, I can't describe those studies, but I can provide you with this nugget: "They[Landsteiner and Popper] made the modest suggestion that poliomyelitis might be caused by an invisible virus, an opinion soon confirmed by other experiments"
Paul JR (1971). A History of Poliomyelitis. Yale studies in the history of science and medicine. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press.
Look it up, then you can misrepresent some more research, but I think you've wasted enough of my time.
Where are your references? You cite an unreferenced quote? Is that how low science has sunk? Man you are clueless, you claim there are experiments that prove Popper's intracranial injection of 2 monkeys with no controls but can't describe them and just throw a fit? Why are you making claims without being able to describe primary sources?
The Battle Against Polio
by Stephanie True Peters 2005 In this book, and in many other places the Popper experiment is still used as proof.
Maybe cooler is Billy Corgan?
@Gus Snarp, you obviously don't understand the majesty of Cooler's power.
Cooler is using homeopathic science. The smaller the samples, the truer the results.
Dr. Jay, have a look at this recent Medscape article: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/711698
There's never any shame in changing one's mind after reviewing new information.
@titmouse
That's the article! Thanks for reposting.
Oh put up the wrong link. Here's the one I read yesterday about four recent studies concerning use of the flu vaccine during pregnancy:
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=107116
Dr Jay sez "@ antipodean: My "MD" is regarded as a "science degree" in most circles and the initials FAAP are part of the name I use on Twitter and elsewhere. You can just call me . . . Jay"
That is quite an amusing statement to real scientists. An MD might be regarded as a science degree in circles that are ignorant of scientific endevour. It's not even a real doctorate, for goodness sake. It's a professional qualification wherein you must memorize a lot of facts that were derived by the scientific method and regurgitate them upon command. This is not a scientific qualification, it is not a real doctorate. And neither is the FAAP a relevant qualification. And your excuse for using that as a bolster is that you use it elsewhere as a bolster...
Absolutely, some MDs can be taken seriously as scientists without a PhD (or suitable equivalent) if they have demonstrated scientific expertise. Jay has no scientific degree and zero published scientific contributions (not even in pediatric medicine after many many years in practice). Yet he tries to use an MD to claim a scientifically priviledged role in making scientific comments on infectious disease, immunology, (and damaging the) public health etc etc.
It's like trumpeting your grade 3 orienteering certificate during a conversation about rejigging electoral boundaries: irrelevant.
disregard me i sucks cock
Some medical schools now have a research requirement to graduate. At these schools, students have to write an "MD Thesis". Due to time constraints, these are probably generally weaker than most masters theses. But it's a step in the right direction for increasing scientific competency among physicians.
Billy X:
Just a thought: Billy Corgan does seem to be a massive drama queen. When he reformed the group, he took back the one guy who had actually *killed* someone (an incident involving a drug overdose) and went out of his way to alienate D'arcy Wretzky, losing any chance of getting James Iha back in the process.
Corgan's formula for forming or reforming a band seems to be something that runs along these lines:
1) Add second guitarist who isn't James Iha;
2) Recruit a female bassist;
3) Rehire Jimmy Chamberlain to play drums (this step,
obviously, doesn't apply to Zwan, IIRC);
4) Add optional keyboardist.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
I'm utterly disgusted that he's now a member of the
Anti-vax Celebrity Creep Brigade, of course.
So the pumpkins are by far my favorite band, and I've followed them rather closely for quite a while. As a long standing atheist, I've learned to sort of just ignore most of Corgan's growing involvement in new age spiritualism. Not my thing obviously, but he's not very loud about it (unless you're really seeking it out), so its not been an issue. I listen when he has things to say about music, culture, abuse, and art, because he is typically very insightful and articulate when he's speaking within his areas of actual expertise.
I find two things disappointing about this post. First, it sucks to hear your favorite musician holds some beliefs that are strongly anti-science. Sigh. Second, it's disappointing to see commenter's who are supposed to be skeptical indulge in their own bit of poor thinking when the subject moves away from science. Billy the narcissistic ego-maniac drama queen who must be a total tool and hack... where exactly does that sentiment come from? Actual knowledge, or media hyperbole? So quick to evaluate and make knowing statements about the guy, the arrogance of ignorance indeed.
From http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=87974932
Why, no, I guess we're not familiar with 'the Hannah Poling case where the government conceded vaccines caused Hannah's autism'! We're only familiar with the Hannah Poling case that took place in this reality!
Antaeus Feldspar, the evidence for the existence of cooler is very sparse. It's hilarious that you've drunk the 'cooler exists' kool-aid, you sheeple. What have you got? Some random 'comments' on 'blogs'? Absurd! I pity your persistent virginity and your hideous significant other, you pawn of the cooler-existence conspiracy. GROW UP NERD.
Hey, did anyone catch Dr. Jay on Larry King the other night?
I wasted an hour of my life watching the entire 6-part series. If anyone wants to bother, just watch the last one, which pretty much summarizes the whole thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9_A588mqH0&NR=1
Summary: a Catalonian nun, with an MD, is worried about the swine flu vaccine. She goes into great detail explaining flu, vaccines, the appearance of swine flu, etc. etc. She gets some numbers and facts wrong.
She's very verbose and repetitive, so the bits of conspiracy theory buried in there are pretty subtle. Some of the tidbits:
- Swine flu was probably man-made (I believe she has some facts about the relation of various flus incorrect, but one point she brings up is that the swine flu is "identical" to the flu from (IIRC) 1977. This is very suspicious.)
- Drug manufacturer Baxter in Austria shipped out some flu vaccines which were found to have unattenuated live bird AND seasonal flu
- the mortality of swine flu is less than that of the least morbid seasonal flu
- she's paranoid about forced vaccinations
- swine flu vaccine is untested
- something about people who want to take over the world (she did not say "Illuminati" but I thought it at the first reference)
- She somehow brought up the Madrid terrorist attacks, I think in an effort at using the change in government that followed to demonstrate that the people can get things done
- swine flu vaccination is more dangerous than the flu itself
- I think she needs some medication
The person who wrote the intro for Jenny "Shouting Down Scientists" McCarthy is asking for Interrobang to be "kicked to the curb" because of her tone - WTF.
Although, I must say that the use of "smarmy little asshole" and "putz" in the same post had me clutching my pearls and heading for the fainting couch.
Anybody have stats on how much more likely pregnant women are to suffer serious complications with the swine flu? Alberta's Chief Medical Officer of Health gave some figure on the radio, but I can't remember what it was.
Uh, you didn't do something very basic here, like type the term "Hannah Poling" into the little search box in the left sidebar, did you?
First obviously post #126 is an imposter who is impersonating me. Secondly, there is no doubt that the court ruled that vaccines played a major role in triggering Hannah's autism, that is why they paid the family from the vaccine injury Compensation Fund. You can see the CDC director contradict herself right here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh-nkD5LSIg
Wow... fail troll is fail...
Cooler, you are one of the WORST trolls I have ever seen. A good troll doesn't try to get into an actual debate with people more knowledgeable than himself. A good troll is able to use psychological tactics to turn the discussion away from himself. I've seen good trolls singlehandedly bring entire forums to a state of "civil war." Not just discussion threads, entire forums. Bad trolls, however, quickly become the subject of mockery. You've already made a complete ass of yourself. Why don't you just leave?
Jay Gordon says:
I don't recommend vaccination of healthy pregnant women and healthy children except under the circumstances listed above.
Here in the UK, healthy pregnant women (with no other conditions than pregnancy, in fact) are just about the worst risk group for H1N1, and have had a very high mortality rate.
I don't see that there is any difference in the US:
http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/guidance/pregnant.htm
http://healthcare-research.suite101.com/article.cfm/h1n1_virus_killing_…
How does missing out the highest risk group make ANY sense???
Says Dr. Jay: "I have been clear in my answers:
Children with asthma, diabetes, compromised immune systems, cardiovascular disease and perhaps other illnesses should consult with the specialists taking care of their conditions and I would certainly defer when those specialists recommend getting seasonal or H1N1 flu vaccine...Prometheus, Bacon, Titmouse, is my position clear?"
Slightly less muddy, but far from clear.
You make it sound as though children with the above conditions are entirely the responsibility of specialists, and that you won't take any action as far as recommending flu vaccination unless those specialists press the issue. You do not go on record personally regarding protection for these vulnerable patients. Are you abdicating a significant role for yourself in making sure that these children are maximally protected from a serious preventable disease? Do you see yourself as having any responsibility to educate parents on the special vulnerabilities these children have?
What of the statement on your website that you plan on giving no H1N1 immunizations this year? Are you planning to update that to reflect that you'll give in on this score if the specialists request it?
And lastly, how did you come to the conclusion that healthy pregnant women and healthy children don't need flu vaccination? What leads you to believe that you know more than the CDC's panel of experts and your own pediatric professional organization, the AAP? You say that "current vaccine recommendations are not as safe as they could be". What is your basis for deciding that safety is insufficient, what level of safety would satisfy you, and how do you determine that the risks of influenza are lower than vaccine-associated risks?
Please clarify your views on these subjects.
Incidentally, Dr. Jay's claim that the M.D. is a "science" degree seems intended to justify his excursions into the meaning and value of scientific research and the field of immunization. The M.D. degree merely signifies a basic familiarity with preclinical sciences and a rudimentary level of accomplishment in clinical medicine. It by no means qualifies an individual to sound off as an expert in research protocols and ethics, or in specialty fields that require a great deal of additional training and experience. Dr. Jay lacks such expertise, and having an oversized ego does not make up for it. (Note: I also possess an M.D. degree and postgraduate specialty training as well as a limited research background, but I don't pretend that I know more than dedicated and highly experienced researchers and public health specialists solely on the basis of my own experience or through exchanging cyber-hugs with like-minded people on the Internet).
Bacon--
We both spent a lot of years after high school getting that MD. A lot of work, thousands of clinical hours and more. If you're foolish enough to denigrate that process and our degree, that's your problem and not mine. You might have "a rudimentary level of accomplishment in clinical medicine" but my level of accomplishment spans decades and includes hundreds of thousands of patient contact experiences. I love your comments about my ego. Maybe you're not so good at clinical medicine, but I have to be.
I defer to specialists taking care of children with certain conditions and usually support the decisions made by those specialists. I do not abdicate my role in the decision making process but I defer those docs. I do not defer to ID doctors on this particular matter because it's too complex to be left in their hands. Other than psychiatrists, I can't think of another specialty with their hands deeper in the pharma cookie jar. Can you?
("Pharma Shill gambit!!" oh, be please quiet Bacon. . . )
Have a Nice Weekend All,
Jay
Dr. Jay,
I know you weren't directing your comment at me. However...when I say that a medical degree is not a science degree, I am not "denigrating" the medical degree. Not at all! I have one. However, I am recognizing its limitations. The vast majority of MDs are NOT scientists. They just aren't, and neither are you. Doing a PhD after having obtained my MD made that very, very clear to me, and your frequent statements overvaluing your personal clinical anecdotes over science, clinical trials, and epidemiology have shown me without a doubt that you are not a scientist. Sorry if that last statement hurts, but it's very clearly the truth.
The two forms of training are quite different. MD training teaches you the basics of how the body works and how to care for patients, and residency training takes that basis and builds on it to teach you how to apply it in a specialty. PhD training teaches you the scientific method, advanced knowledge about a scientific subject, and the basics of how to do research under the close guidance of a mentor in the form of your thesis advisor. Postdoctoral fellowships cement that knowledge and teach you how to do independent research and develop a research program on your own. It's very, very different.
That's not to say that someone with an MD can't be a scientist. Indeed, I've worked with some MDs who are stellar scientists. However, they did not get that way from their medical training. They got that way by taking time out to do research, much as graduate students and postdoctoral fellows do.
Wow. Just wow. Just... really? Wow. What a statement. So the doctors that actually spent time specializing and learning about infectious diseases can't be trusted with the subject of flu vaccination because it's too complex? Really? Because in your next statement, you make it pretty simple.
Cardiologists, urologists, dermatologists, etc, but that's irrelevant. You've decided that it's all about Big Pharma and not about actual patient care. You continue to confirm to me that I would never, ever want you caring for my son.
Oh and as for a MD degree being a science degree? HAH! I'm with Orac. I may have a MD, but my high school chemistry and physics professor was the one who beat the scientific method into my head, not my med school professors.
Cooler's argument seems to be:
1) A plaintiff must scientifically prove that they received actual harm from a vaccine in order to be paid from the VICP.
2) Hannah Poling's family was paid from the VICP.
3) Therefore it was scientifically proved that Hannah Poling was harmed by a vaccine.
Now, this argument has the quality that we call being "valid" - in deductive logic, it means that if the premises in the first two lines are factually true, then the conclusion drawn from them in the first line is also factually true.
However, if cooler had done his research, he would have discovered long before this that his premise 1 is not factually true. The VICP does require that the plaintiff show at least the basics of cause and effect (i.e., no getting paid for an alleged "vaccine injury" when you didn't even get a vaccination, or when the "injury" preceded the vaccination) and it requires that the plaintiff show a "biologically plausible mechanism" by which the vaccine could conceivably have caused injury. But the VICP is what's called a "no-fault" system, which means that it explicitly does not require a plaintiff to prove that they received harm from a vaccine.
It's not like a legal victory ever constitutes scientific proof, but a favorable decision in the VICP doesn't even have the significance of a favorable decision in the normal tort system, since the standards in the VICP are so much looser.
Dr. Jay: "We both spent a lot of years after high school getting that MD. A lot of work, thousands of clinical hours and more. If you're foolish enough to denigrate that process and our degree, that's your problem and not mine. You might have "a rudimentary level of accomplishment in clinical medicine" but my level of accomplishment spans decades and includes hundreds of thousands of patient contact experiences."
As Orac's reiteration of my point should have made clear to you by now (unless you superficially glossed over his remarks as well), I was referring to basic medical school training as qualifying one in the rudiments of the art and science of medicine. Postgraduate residency training refines and builds on that background when it comes to patient care, but most trainee physicians are not exposed to significant work in research beyond maybe co-authoring a case report and literature review in a specialty journal. And residency in pediatrics certainly doesn't qualify one to make ill-informed sneering remarks about infectious disease, immunology or any other medical/scientific field that requires additional training and experience.
And while you claim that you haven't abdicated your role to specialists, it remains unclear just what your role is (apart from discouraging vaccination) when it comes to patients and their families who are vulnerable to preventable infectious disease.
I ran into a very PRO-vaccine statement from a vaguely public figure, graphic novelist Warren Ellis, and thought I'd post it to show that some people with fans are on the side of science-based medicine.
http://www.freakangels.com/?p=203&page=3
(Warning: although this page is mostly editorial, the comic is definitely for mature audiences.)
that's actually one of the worst instrumented virus deals in this global madness. as an example, last year in one region were as twice as many cases of normal flu as this year after this swine flu "hit" the same region. What's so pandemic about a lower infected population as last year ???
What happens in one region is, of course, not necessarily representative of the global state of affairs.
You should work on your grammar. It is difficult to understand what you are trying to convey.
I have also blogged my despair at this:
Specifically on the science of why the virus can happily occur in nature without the need fort conspiratorial scientist types...
http://andyourelectronmicroscope.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/billy-dont-be…
Why are pro-vaccinators so upset by anti-vaccinators? we have the right to vaccinate ourselves and our children and those that dont want to, dont have to. They risk themselves and we protect ourselves???? right????
Or is it that even those who have been vaccinated are shit scared because they are not really that effective???
Where is your faith in science, science buffs.
@doc: I'm only answering your trolling on a 6 month old post because I am waiting for my data to run. Otherwise, I'd ignore your stupidity.
Vaccines are effective for most people. However, they do not confer immunity to everyone who gets them (I have had most of the childhood diseases - yes, I am that old - yet am still not immune to mumps and measles. I had the diseases and have had the vaccines. Still not immune.)
So no, we are not "shit scared". We are rational and logical. We happen to understand the science behind vaccines. The more people who ARE protected through vaccines, the safer those of us who aren't immune are.
Moron.