Andrew Wakefield wants a "live public televised debate." Oh, goody.

By oracknows on April 17, 2013.

I want to thank Dan Olmsted, the editor of Age of Autism. I think.

Why do I say this? After all, Olmsted is the managing editor of perhaps the most wretched hive of antivaccine scum and quackery that I am aware of. However, he's actually done me a favor. You see, the other day, the instigator of the U.K. anti-MMR wing of the antivaccine movement, Andrew Wakefield, posted a video to YouTube because he's really feeling some serious butthurt right now:

Basically, it's Andrew Wakefield complaining about being blamed for an ongoing measles outbreak in South Wales. Of course, given that, if there's one person most responsible for causing MMR uptake in the U.K. to tank, it's arguably Andrew Wakefield. Yes, it's true that he didn't do it alone. Unfortunately, he had lots of help. In particular, he had the help of Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet who, for reasons known only to himself, decided to publish Wakefield's crappy little case series of 12 children who were presented as evidence of a potential link between the MMR vaccine and bowel problems in autistic children in 1998. Then there was the U.K. press, which ate the story up and conspired in playing up the possibility of the MMR vaccine somehow causing or contributing to autism. then, of course, there's the U.K. contingent of the antivaccine movement, which latched on to Wakefield's fraudulent "science" as support for its general belief that vaccines are evil. Worse, Wakefield himself appears to have loved the attention he got as the "brave maverick doctor" who found something that The Man didn't want him to find. Never mind that he was in the pay of a trial lawyer suing vaccine manufacturers when he did his Lancet series, as has been amply documented by Brian Deer. In the U.K. and, to a lesser extent, in the U.S., Wakefield has become a major nidus upon which antivaccine parents latch in their social networks trying to convince new parents not to vaccinate.

So why am I "thanking" Dan Olmsted? Easy. He published the transcript of Wakefield's whiny wankfest above, so that I don't have to watch the entire thing. Watching Wakefield's slimy, self-serving, disingenuous verbal prestidigitation for more than a couple of minutes quite literally gives me a barfy feeling in the pit of my stomach. And for that, I think Olmsted. Of course, reading the transcript of Wakefield's slimy, self-serving, disingenuous verbal prestidigitation is almost as bad, but at least I don't have to look at Wakefield's shifty visage and listen to that smug, self-satisfied voice.

Wakefield begins by saying that, really and truly, it's not his fault that there's been an outbreak of measles in South Wales. Don't pay attention to the government, which apparently did link the massive decline in MMR uptake that occurred beginning in the late 1990s and early 2000s. "Don't blame me," Wakefield says (I'm paraphrasing). "Don't blame me for measles outbreaks because I whipped up a fake scare and riding it to fame and infamy."

No, Wakefield says, blame the government because it didn't listen to me and offer the single measles vaccine instead of the triple vaccine for the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR):

So, what happened subsequently. At that time the single measles vaccine, the single vaccines were available freely on the National Health Service. Otherwise, I would not have suggested that option. So parents, if they were legitimately concerned about the safety of MMR could go and get the single vaccines. Six months later the British government unilaterally withdrew the importation licence for the single vaccines therefore depriving parents of having these on the NHS; depriving parents who had legitimate concerns about the safety of MMR from a choice; denying them the opportunity to protect their children in the way that they saw fit.

And I was astonished by this and I said to Dr Elizabeth Miller of the Health Protection Agency why would you do this, if your principal concern is to protect children from serious infectious disease. Why would you remove an option from parents who are legitimately concerned about the safety of MMR. And her answer was extraordinary. She said to me if we allow parents the option of single vaccines it would destroy our MMR programme. In other words her concern, her principal concern seemed to be for protection of the MMR programme and not for protection of children.

Now, were parents concerns about the safety of MMR legitimate? Did they have a reason to be concerned? The answer is unequivocably yes.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong! There have been large, well-designed epidemiological studies that have failed to find even a hint of a whiff of a correlation between the MMR vaccine and autism. In fact, of all the antivaccine "hypotheses" in which vaccines cause autism, the one that has arguably been the most thoroughly refuted by cold, hard evidence is the link between MMR and autism claimed by Wakefield and his acolytes. Indeed, as Dr. Michael Fitzgerald points out, vaccination rates plummeted as a result of the Wakefield-inspired antivaccine hysteria, leading the measles, which had been almost eliminated in Britain, to come roaring back to endemic levels by 2008. Of course, Wakefield's attempt to weasel out of the blame that so rightly falls on his shoulder involves pointing out that MMR uptake rates have recovered and are now above 90% The problem with that retort is that there is now a large cohort of older children who were infants and toddlers around the time of the MMR scare who were never vaccinated against the measles. They are now vulnerable to the highly contagious measles virus. Herd immunity, which was degraded by the decline in MMR vaccine uptake due to the MMR-autism scare, is still degraded, as vaccine uptake has only just recovered to acceptable levels.

So let's consider Wakefield's self-serving, self-centered "logic," such as it is. To him, it's not his fault that there was an MMR scare. Never mind that there was no science behind his claims. Never mind that there was no evidence to support his claim that the MMR triple vaccine is dangerous and that the "single jab" measles vaccine was safer. As Matt Carey puts it:

Well, 15 years ago Mr. Wakefield’s team at the Royal Free Hospital released a paper which suggested a link between autism and the MMR vaccine. Mr. Wakefield did much more than suggest a link. At the press conference for the paper’s release (note that very few papers have press conferences) Mr. Wakefield called for the suspension of the MMR vaccine in favor of single measles, mumps and rubella vaccines. He didn’t really explain why the single vaccine would be more safe in his mind, making it very difficult for parents to accept how the single vaccines were, in his faulty opinion, safe.

Mr. Wakefield’s current logic has it that it is the government’s fault for not allowing the importation of single vaccines. Ignore the unfounded fear that Mr. Wakefield created about measles vaccines, he asks. Blame the government. Sure the government can take some blame (anyone recall when the prime minister refused to answer whether his family used the MMR?). As does the press. But without Andrew Wakefield and his faulty assertions, there would have been no scare.

Precisely.

Now here comes the hilarious part. Those of you who've been regular readers know one characteristic that many cranks share, one tactic that many of them like to fall back on when they are feeling cornered. Do you know what it is? (No fair telling if you already know, having either already watched this video or heard about it on other blogs!) When I saw this part of the video, I couldn't help but think of the famous scene from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, when Kirk informs Khan, "Here it comes," except that, instead of using photon torpedos Wakefield uses bollocks as ammunition (as Tim Minchin would put it).

So here it comes:

What I'm suggesting is a formal scientific debate in public in front of an audience that is televised. And specifically Dr David Salisbury I would like to debate you because I believe you are at the heart of this matter. I believe the decisions taken by you and by your committee, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, lie at the heart of this matter.

There are many things to debate with you.

Sure there are...if you're an antivaccine crank like Wakefield. If you're a scientist or physician practicing science-based medicine, not so much.

So what is it about cranks and their demands for "public debates"? They especially like "televised public debates," as Wakefield called for right now. I know I've asked this question many times before, but it's a legitimate question. Cranks love public debates, and they love to challenge their perceived foes to such spectacles. Wakefield is a crank; so it's not at all surprising that he would resort to this tactic. The reasons are obvious to those of us who are familiar with the techniques of the crank: They can Gish gallop to their hearts' content, weaving and bobbing, zig-zagging hither, thither, and yon among cherry picked studies, evidence, and other data. This is not the first time he's done this, either. It was only a few days ago that he posted an offer "to debate any serious challenger on MMR vaccine safety and the role of MMR in autism, live, in public, and televised." Oh goody. I can hardly wait. Of course, as I've pointed out many times before, "live public debates" are singularly uninformative and almost always favor the crank or quack, which is precisely why cranks love them so.

Amusingly, if Wakefield really wanted such a public debate, he could probably have it. For instance, Michael Fitzgerald, a physician with an autistic child, has said that he would debate Wakefield. In fact, Fitzgerald even describes how serious Wakefield is when he calls for "public debates." The answer is, not surprisingly, not serious at all:

The only occasion when Dr Wakefield has engaged in any debate on British TV came in the discussion following the broadcast of the hagiographical docudrama Hear the Silence in December 2003. Flanked by his US acolytes Jeffrey Bradstreet and Arthur Krigsman, and parent supporters, Dr Wakefield appeared assertive and defensive in response to challenges from Evan Harris (then a Liberal Democrat MP) and myself. Wakefield has subsequently restricted his public appearances to conferences of sympathetic parents, anti-vaccination activists and promoters of quack autism therapies. When I asked him a question from the floor at one such conference in Bournemouth in February 2007, he simply refused to answer, deferring to another platform speaker. When I offered to debate with him at a follow-up conference in March 2009, the organisers refused.

Does anyone think that anything different will happen. Wakefield chooses to challenge someone who he knows can't or won't agree to such a spectacle to a debate, safe in the knowledge that there's no way he'll actually have to debate. Then, when someone who knows his stuff tries to call Wakefield's bluff and get him to debate, Wakefield makes like brave, brave Sir Robin.

Same as it ever was.

More like this

The legacy of Andrew Wakefield continues

Actions have consequences. No matter how much the person might want to try to hide from the consequences of one's actions, they frequently have a way of coming back, grabbing you by the neck, and letting you know they're there. We see it happening now in the U.K. Fifteen years ago, British doctor…

How not to report science and medical news, vaccine edition

I realize I complain periodically about when I get into what seems to me to be a rut in which I'm writing pretty much only about anti-vaccine lunacy. This is just such a week, when the news on the vaccine front has been coming fast and furious, first with Andrew Wakefield's being found to have…

Jenny McCarthy weighs in about Andrew Wakefield--with predictable results

The fallout from Brian Deer's further revelations of the scientific fraud that is anti-vaccine hero Andrew Wakefield continues apace. Remember last week, when I wrote about the first article of the two-part series enumerating the various ways that Andrew Wakefield committed scientific fraud in…

"Interesting times," thanks to a confluence of anti-vaccine pseudoscience

An old Chinese combined proverb and curse is said to be, "May you live in interesting times." Certainly, with respect to vaccines, the last few years have been "interesting times." Unfortunately, this week times are about to get a lot more "interesting" as the Autism One quackfest descends upon…

I think we should have a Google hangout with Dr. Jay. Who's with me?

@lilady:

@ LW: Ask Dr. Jay if he and his staff have received the Tdap vaccine, which is recommended for all HCWs and others who have contact with infants under one year of age.

He's not real big on answering my questions. *I* on the other hand got my TDaP vaccine last summer.

@Brian Deer- be a real reporter.

Let's see, two British Press Awards, numerous speaking engagements at prestigious venues, real investigative reporting that has blown the lid off of Bactrim, Vioxx and the Wakefield fraud and you want him to be like whom? Jake Crosby? Bwahahaha.

@ Dr. Jay: What Darwy stated at post # 484, about having that paper "bookmarked" days before you posted it.

You never provided varicella vaccine under a compassionate use protocol for kids with leukemia and solid tumors, during the 1970s or 1980s. As I stated up thread the local health departments controlled the distribution of VZIG for post exposure prophylaxis.

@ Brian Deer: I'm constantly linking to your website on the other blogs I post on...especially in reply to the crank posters from AoA: :-)

http://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tech/2013/04/giving-space-andrew-wakefi…

@LW (#498)--Why should Dr. Gordon do research when he can sell books and webinars exempt from peer review? And why should Dr. Bob bother testing his alternate vaccine schedule to see if it is "safer", including whether it has any effect on the incidence of autism in those children of the parents he has brainwashed into using it? I mean, really, that infernal Dr. Bob schedule has been out for only 6-7 years. You can't really expect Dr. Bob to take time out from his busy cash-only clinic to actually track patient outcomes, can you?

But again, why bother with peer review when you can just be a huckster and not give a damn about the harm you are causing to our children when your actions directly cause vaccination rates to fall?

Sadly, I have to wonder if it won't be someone who followed Dr. Bob's/Jay's advice (and it would be nice to see Wakefield named as well) whose child was harmed by a vaccine-preventable disease that finally makes a dent in their teflon by dragging them into court for a malpractice suit.

@ jen: Still cyber-stalking me with incorrect (libelous), information?

"@Dr. Jay, @lilady: who are you? She is a bully who engages in tracking (cyber-stalking). She tried to have Kent Heckenlively in trouble with his job due to his beliefs. She has mentioned your staff and their actions. Her name is known to those at his schoolboard, presumably.

@Brian Deer- be a real reporter."

Take a look at the actually emails I sent to the School Board President, Greg Marvel and members of the School Board (Posts # 23 through # 40) Take particular note of my post where I actually mention you...because you "assumed" I emailed these individuals using my 'nym:

Do you see any mention of Kent Heckenlively in my emails?

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/04/11/and-now-anne-frank-is-drag…

Jen, Brian Deer is a real reporter, who did a spectacular job of investigating Andrew Wakefield, Richard Barr and the JABS anti-vaccine group in the U.K., which referred parents of developmentally disabled children to that lawyer who was getting set to sue the manufacturers of the MMR vaccine.

Mr. Deer is the recipient of two journalism awards, which are the equivalent of Pulitzer awards for his excellent investigative journalism.

Jen a.k.a. Dr. Dent a.k.a. Sick Sauce...You really need another hobby and some professional help for your cyber stalking behaviors, because this one is not working out too well for you.

I think we should have a Google hangout with Dr. Jay. Who’s with me?

As soon as I figure out how to work with google hangout, I'm in.

Alain

I have to tell you, if I could take a day off and just read and comment here I would. I know some of you think I'm BS'ing, but I really learn a lot here and I enjoy many aspects of these spirited discussions.

@Chris Hickie: I do not have a schedule for vaccinating. I have vaccinated two-month-olds whose parents were concerned about pertussis and pneumococcus and I have other families who have chosen not to ever vaccinate. If I had to mention an "average" family in the practice I'd tell you that they wait 6-36 months and then get a DTaP series. I recommend and push Varivax before age ten years if kids have contracted not chickenpox. More families are choosing to give their children the MMR vaccine. My second choice of vaccine series is the PCV13 but I have very little enthusiasm for that vaccine. Some, but not all teens and college age kids get meningococcal vaccine and hepatitis B vaccination. I recommend hepatitis A shots for more exotic travel and add an extra caution when people are traveling to places where medical care (eg. a tetanus booster) will not be easily available.

@Science Mom: No one can prove adverse effects from the MMR. I am stuck with anecdotes and observation. I have absolutely no need for you to agree and sure don't blame you for seeing things very differently.

@Khani: I would value your experiences and your relating them to this group. Why would you place no value in my experience?

@LW: You may be right in both your comments. But, I do shape my vaccine practices for the benefit of society. We just disagree. You're not "stupid" or "irresponsible" or . . . we just disagree.

@lillady: My staff is fully vaccinated. I do not require them all to receive influenza vaccines.

@Narad: Thank you

@Darwy: It happened. The chickenpox vaccine was available for non-immune adults prior to licensure.

@Brian Deer: I have read everything you've written. I'd love to know if you're more accurate in depicting what happened than AW's supporters. Your case is quite convincing but so is theirs.

@Bacon: The flu shot is not a good vaccine. Period. It's all we've got so get it if you want. You know the Minnesota study.

@Ren: After 400, I get paid by the word.

@Politicalguineapig: Breastfeeding is not "admirable," it saves more lives than any vaccine ever invented. [Citation needed here!!]

@jen: Thank you.

@JGC: Any "Princess Bride" reference gets my attention. I looked up "valid." No anecdotes on vaccine safety. We shouldn't give six at once. It's expedient and economically brilliant but there are safer ways of immunizing.

@Beamup: No! My personal experience is not "more accurate" just worth considering. That's all.

@LW: Good point. Not doable in any way shape or form, but a good point.

@Todd W.: First one has to get measles to be susceptible to the 15-40% hospitalization rate. Reasoning not worthy of your usually logical comments.

@Ren: I'm in.

@lilady: Again, who are you?

@Science Mom: No one can prove adverse effects from the MMR. I am stuck with anecdotes and observation. I have absolutely no need for you to agree and sure don’t blame you for seeing things very differently.

Yes adverse effects can be proved and have; encephalopathy (mostly following ADEM), anaphylaxis, thrombocytopaenia and even asceptic meningitis for the serious adverse events (just to name a few). But you also stated that they occur at a rate of 1-2% which is quite specific and deserves to be qualified with more than "observation and anecdote". You did come up with that range so how did you ascertain it?

If people who are more knowledgeable on a subject than I, it would give me pause that they vehemently "disagree" with me and would question myself. If I were honestly interested in learning that is.

@Beamup: No! My personal experience is not “more accurate” just worth considering. That’s all.

And yet, you act otherwise... as documented upthread. Even leaving aside the fact that, no, it is NOT worth considering. It's completely trumped by the actual evidence.

Alright. Everyone go take a crash course on Google Hangouts. It will either be a shout-fest worthy of Fox News or it will be a frank discussion worthy of CSPAN.

@Dr. Jay

Way back at comment #288 you said, "We used the vaccine in 1977 and beyond. I used that vaccine during those years for non-immune adults and children who were immunocompromised. It became increasingly difficult to get it from the manufacturer in the eighties"

Now you're saying, "@Darwy: It happened. The chickenpox vaccine was available for non-immune adults prior to licensure."

So, which is it, Dr. Jay?

Did you administer the vaccine to children in the 70's, before it became available from Japan, and off from clinical trials?

Or now is it you gave it only to non-immune adults pre-1985 licensure by 'special request' to the vaccine manufacturer (despite it still being in clinical trial status at that time)?

@ Ren #510 -- "frank discussion worthy of CSPAN."

Have you ever seen a C-SPAN call-in segment???? :-)

@ Dr. Jay: "Again, who are you"?

You're just a know-nothing pediatrician, whose "claim to fame" is predicated on being "the pediatrician to the stars" and who got his posterior whupped here.

You claim you deign to post here to teach us "civility"...need I remind you that you were not "civil" when you slammed Orac a while back, with your feeble attempt to derail a discussion about the Burzynski clinic?

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/02/18/as-josh-duhamel-shills-for…

"Jay Gordon, MD, FAAP
February 18, 2013

“much the way that Leni Riefenstahl was”

David, Hitler? Really??

Having a really bad day there?

Cheer up: The influenza season is ending owed a to vibrant national vaccine policy.

AND, I changed my Twitter picture to the one showing me getting a hepatitis A vaccine prior to my trip to rural Ethiopia!

Jay"

You still have not acknowledged that you were unable to cough up the studies that back up your ludicrous *opinions* about the MMR, PCV and varicella vaccines, that are the basis of your immunization *policies*.

Seriously Jay, think about wearing a protective helmet when you play soccer...too many hits to the head, does have an effect on your thinking processes.

@lilady: You're increasingly unpleasant and I can't possibly be the only one here who notices that. I have been told that you also come after people in real life. I will no longer respond at all to you because you have no interest in a discussion.

With all of your permission, I'd like to retract the "1-2%" estimate. I don't like it now any more than you do. I have no idea how many children suffer adverse MMR reactions and those numbers were incorrectly colored by confirmation bias. They are not defensible.

@Jay

First one has to get measles to be susceptible to the 15-40% hospitalization rate.

Which anyone who has either not been immunized or has not been infected previously is. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but there have been a number of outbreaks of measles in recent years in the U.S. What was the status of the index cases? Not vaccinated and not immune! What was the status of the majority (and in some cases, all) of the cases in those outbreaks? Not vaccinated and not immune!

You see, when you do not recommend MMR, and especially when you take an attitude of "MMR is dangerous", as you do rather frequently, immunization rates drop. When immunization rates drop and there are large numbers of susceptible people, conditions are ripe for outbreaks of disease.

Of course, as you've said before, those outbreaks are just "statistical porn" and hospitalizations can't be for serious reasons. No. They must be "soft hospitalizations".

Tell me, Dr. Gordon, in the current outbreak in Wales, which is now around 900 cases and over 80 hospitalizations and one suspected death, is that just "statistical porn"? Are those hospitalizations "soft"?

Now, about your evidence that 1%-2% of MMR recipients suffer severe adverse reactions. Pony up the evidence. If you cannot, then kindly retract your statement, don't make that claim again and show us that you can change.

Cross-posted. Thank you for doing the right thing and retracting your made-up statement that 1%-2% of children suffer severe AEs after MMR.

No, it’s a paraphrase from this CDC report.

That's France, Jay (and being in EID doesn't make it a CDC report). One other interesting mutation found there is deletion of ptx (oops). If you really want Prn− central, you want to head to Japan, where, oddly, the Prn− isolates were still prn1.

All we've got for the U.S. is PMID 23388024. A back-of-the-envelope calculation of what would happen if we magically wound up with all-Prn− B. pertussis is at goo.gl/a9wxr. I tend to doubt that this is driving pertussis epidemiology at this point, leaving "we’re going to need a new vaccine soon" somewhere between overstatement and something that would cause Zwicky to make a fuss at a Q&A.

Jay: "@lilady: You’re increasingly unpleasant and I can’t possibly be the only one here who notices that."

What I notice is that you are avoiding substantive responses to her questions and comments (as well as those of most other posters) in favor of harping on civility - a commodity that is periodically in very short supply in your own posts (for instance, repeatedly and snidely asking her "who are you?" does not advance the discussion).

You say your staff is "fully vaccinated". What does that mean, exactly (you indicate flu vaccine is optional) - what vaccines do they get?

And as previously asked - do _you_ ever get immunized against influenza or other pathogens (such as pertussis) to protect patients hospitalized in facilities for which you have clinical privileges - either voluntarily or because it's mandated? Why do you seem reluctant to answer?

"@lilady: You’re increasingly unpleasant and I can’t possibly be the only one here who notices that. I have been told that you also come after people in real life. I will no longer respond at all to you because you have no interest in a discussion."

Yeah Jay, I'm a real cyber stalker, according to the troll jen. Did you even read jen's libelous accusation that I wrote to Ken Heckenlively's employer? Did you actually read the emails I sent to the school, superintendent and the entire school board? Did you see any mention of Kent Heckenlively?

While you've been pandering to the cranks at AoA, sucking up to Robert Kennedy Jr. and every celeb mommy, starting with Jenny McCarthy, I actually worked in public health clinics, caring for children who were ill with vaccine-preventable diseases.

Time to fold your tent Jay...you've been busted.

Stu #489 - I was thinking more of what the salesman says, whether they'd be ‘allowed’ to, or it be morally right of them to, recommend the buyer remove the seatbelts because they personally don’t like them. (By analogy a doctor [salesperson!] recommending patients not take vaccines [seatbelts] that are ‘standard’ for health reasons. [recommended vaccination schedules].) But whatever! :-)

@Bacon: The substantive questions are difficult to get to.

I will not ask you your personal medical history, will not offer you mine and certainly won't reveal my staff's medical history.

And, Rene' and David have both spoken openly about the problems created for them at work by letter writers. I have been subject to that same assault.

LW #498 and Darwy #499 - but would have him document his observations. (Shock, horror, etc.)

but that would - sorry.

This is interesting:

http://www.healio.com/pediatrics/vaccine-preventable-diseases/news/prin…

@ Ren,

I enabled google hangout for my domain and I'm in.

Alain

"I will not ask you your personal medical history"

I've already mentioned that I get annual flu shots. It's not a big secret.
And _you_ already said that your staff is "fully vaccinated", which by your interpretation must mean that you've (gasp) revealed their "personal medical history". I'm just asking you to qualify what "fully vaccinated" means.

I can envision scenarios in which you'd find it disadvantageous to tell us whether or not you personally follow recommendations for flu vaccination (such as the vaccine mandates for health care workers supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics, California Hospital Association, Infectious Diseases Society of America* etc). But I can't think of any scenario which should make you uncomfortable that involves your actually getting flu shots to protect patients.

To Dr. Hickie: I applaud your involvement on vaccine-related issues. However I don't expect the AAP to crack down on members who don't follow its recommendations on immunization. What does strike me as reasonable is the AAP acting against members who present bad medical advice while giving the impression that the AAP supports them (such as posting an AAP logo on their website, not that I'm suggesting anyone here does that).

*IDSA supports a policy in which influenza vaccination is a condition of employment, unpaid service, or receipt of professional privileges. Employees who cannot be vaccinated due to medical contraindications or because of vaccine supply shortages should be required to wear masks or be re-assigned away from direct patient care."

http://www.idsociety.org/HCWimmunization/

Alain, I never specifically said lilady was stalking me. I do know that she accused someone of something along those lines at Huffpo and her comment was removed. I have just noticed that she seems to re-paste many people's comments and has obviously made trouble for Kent Heckenlively (or somebody at his school board). I've seen her make quite a few threatening remarks as to Dr. Jay's staff - asking stuff about what they're doing. I have noted that someone from here (RI) censured her for her conduct and found it embarrassing.

This is interesting:

I just gave you the primary reference. There were three separate things going on here. And it's different from both France and Japan. One thing it most certainly does not tell you is that 91.7% of pertussis cases are due to Prn− types.

@ Dangerous Bacon: How *uncivil of you* to be asking Dr. Jay about the immunization status of his office staff. Has he really changed his mind about influenza vaccine for himself, since that 2008 speech at Jenny McCarthy's "Green our Vaccines" rally(?)...not according to his website.

Dr. Jay still has not replied to my questions about testing his office staff for immunity against childhood vaccine-preventable-diseases. Nor has he replied to my questions about testing his staff for immunity against varicella and providing the vaccine, once it became available in 1995. Those recommendations about testing and immunizing HCWs are from the CDC and from the AAP.

I also asked Dr. Jay if he and his staff received the Tdap vaccine, which is recommended by the ACIP, the CDC , the IDSA...and the AAP, for all HCWs and anyone who will have contact with infants under the age of one; he never replied.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/737886

So..."who is Dr. Jay?". He's the pediatrician who is identified on Dr. Sears website as being a "Vaccine-Friendly Doctor"

http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/vaccines/find-vaccine-friendly-doctor-…

"Find a Vaccine Friendly Doctor Near You

Some parents choose not to vaccinate their kids. Others want to partially vaccinate. Some aren't sure what they want to do, and they want help figuring what will be best for their child. If you fit into any of these categories, you may have a hard time finding a doctor. I know where I live and work, in Orange County, California, we are one of the only practices that take such patients. Most doctors around here kick patients out of their practice for not vaccinating, or for asking too many questions. That's why I've created a database of a list of doctors who are friendly toward parents who want help with the vaccine decision or who want to delay or decline vaccines."

Dr. Jay, according to Dr. Sears, agreed to be listed as a "Vaccine Friendly Doctor"...

"The doctors listed here will have read, or be familiar with, my book and contacted me to have their practice listed here as a place such patients can come and feel welcome."

Jen
Alain, I never specifically said lilady was stalking me.

Jen has specifically complained in previous threads that lilady was stalking her. This thread she has switched to complaining that lilady is ignoring her. Projection is a helluva drug.

@Bacon @Herr doktor et al

I find lilady's comments and demeanor very threatening. If someone like her were talking to you as she is talking to me, I think you'd feel threatened.

@Ren: I have enabled Google Hangout. Email me when you get a chance, please.

@Dr. Gordon:

With all of your permission, I’d like to retract the “1-2%” estimate. I don’t like it now any more than you do. I have no idea how many children suffer adverse MMR reactions and those numbers were incorrectly colored by confirmation bias. They are not defensible.

In other words, Dr. Gordon made up numbers of adverse reactions.

Words fail me.

Herr doktor, I may have said that earlier. In my post here, though, I was not referring to myself. I do know that when I left my email address by mistake once I felt worried about what someone like her (and not only her) would do. That's all, I'm out.

I'd love nothing more than a G+ hangout, however at 2am CEDT, it's just not happening for me. Have fun, though!

I find lilady’s comments and demeanor very threatening. If someone like her were talking to you as she is talking to me, I think you’d feel threatened.

Oh, please, Dr. Jay. Give me a frikkin' break.

I find lilady’s comments and demeanor very threatening. If someone like her were talking to you as she is talking to me, I think you’d feel threatened.

I sympathise, and I would admonish lilady for her truculence, but I am in no position to be lecturing or advising other people on "best tone for fostering constructive discussions on the internet".

With all of your permission, I’d like to retract the “1-2%” estimate. I don’t like it now any more than you do. I have no idea how many children suffer adverse MMR reactions and those numbers were incorrectly colored by confirmation bias. They are not defensible.

I'm glad to see that you have come to that conclusion and I don't foresee any fallout from it provided that your retraction is sincere. Thank you.

#515

Thanks. :) Really. I hope it does help.

Dr. Jay: I get that it's healthy, but the movement to market it worries me as there's a strong reek of 'get back to the kitchen' about it. And, again, I find it creepy that you're taking credit for the choices the mothers make.

" I would value your experiences and your relating them to this group. Why would you place no value in my experience?"

Because I wouldn't place any *argumentative* value on anyone's personal experiences, including mine. I want to say the phrase we were taught was that "You are not obliged to accept anyone's personal experience as an argument."

That's not to say you can't value a personal experience as story, or as being important to that person. It's just that it doesn't hold weight as an argument, because people experience things quite differently.

It's like an argument by analogy, really. "As water flows downward, human nature is evil" and "As water flows downward, human nature is good." You can always pick them apart by saying "Uh, no, it's really not like that at all," so they're not particularly useful as arguments. Great illustrations, though.

<blockquote. We shouldn’t give six at once. It’s expedient and economically brilliant but there are safer ways of immunizing.

You keep asserting this, but have yet to provide any evidence this is the case. Why is that?

” I would value your experiences and your relating them to this group. Why would you place no value in my experience?”

Given JayBird's track record, I think we have darn good grounds for placing no value in his reported experience.

Just in this thread, he made the idiotic claim that 1-2% of those receiving MMR vaccine have "serious" reaction. He ultimately retracted it, because it is so wrong as to not being funny, but if he can f up that badly on something so simple, then why in the blazes should we take his word on anything?

He thinks we should value his experience, but he has demonstrated that what he calls "his experience" does not necessarily reflect reality, or even his actual experience.

This is why we don't take Jay seriously. He has demonstrated himself to be unreliable. When you have an unreliable source, you don't accept it at its word. You verify what is verifiable, true or false, and you don't accept what you can't verify.

I find lilady’s comments and demeanor very threatening. If someone like her were talking to you as she is talking to me, I think you’d feel threatened.

My orchestra of tiny violin players is threatening to go on strike if they have to play the "Lament For A Petulant Anti-Vaxxer" again.

But on a more serious note, Dr. Jay, you are only finding lilady threatening because she has the courage of her convictions. You, on the other hand, give the unflattering appearance of a band-wagon jumper who abandoned basic medical principles and bought into a belief system that just happened to be personally profitable as well. You courted public attention riding on the coattails of your poorly-informed celebrity patients, and now that the anti-vax chickens are coming home to roost (public exposure of Wakefield's fraud, a well-established body of evidence that vaccines have nothing to do with autism, and renewed epidemics of VPDs that are directly traceable to the vaccine panics that you helped spread.) So stop playing the victim here please, it's extremely distasteful. Take your medicine like a big boy.

there's a fragment missing from the second last sentence of #544: You courted public attention riding on the coattails of your poorly-informed celebrity patients, and now that the anti-vax chickens are coming home to roost (public exposure of Wakefield’s fraud, a well-established body of evidence that vaccines have nothing to do with autism, and renewed epidemics of VPDs that are directly traceable to the vaccine panics that you helped spread) you're trying to walk away from it.

We shouldn’t give six at once. It’s expedient and economically brilliant but there are safer ways of immunizing.

I'm not sure anyone has yet pointed out the fact that the recently published DeStefano Price study of vaccine antigen exposure and autism also looked at the maximum number of antigens received in a single day, and concluded:

These results indicate that parental concerns that their children are receiving too many vaccines in the first 2 years of life or too many vaccines at a single doctor visit are not supported in terms of an increased risk of autism.

Jay, up thread, oozing civility thanked Dangerous Bacon for pointing out his website's statement about MMR...

"@Bacon: That seven-year-old note on my website is out of date. Thanks for calling it to my attention. I don’t recommend the MMR unless travel increases the risks and parents want the vaccine. I do give the vaccine. If I were practicing in Wales right now, I would recommend the MMR vaccine."

I, not oozing civility, called him out for the liar he is. Dr. Jay has been posting his crankery here for years and other posters have questioned his MMR statement. During my shorter tenure here I've questioned Jay about his stance on ("too new for me to recommend") Prevnar vaccines and now the varicella vaccine. Jay, (civilly) dodged my questions...and then actually lied about providing the vaccine during the 1970s-1980s under a "compassionate use protocol" for immune suppressed cancer patients.

When called out about his lack of proof about the MMR, Prevnar and Varicella vaccines by me and other posters here, Jay accuses me...

"I find lilady’s comments and demeanor very threatening. If someone like her were talking to you as she is talking to me, I think you’d feel threatened"

*** Too bad Jay decided to comment and *correct* me, when I posted at Brian Deer an (anecdotal) incident associated with my son contracting varicella just before the varicella vaccine was licensed in United States in 1995.

Moving right along now. Several years ago I questioned Jay's "lactation specialist", who has no medical background providing information to a parent about immunizations. Yep, Cheryl Taylor's vaccination advice is still up on his website:

http://drjaygordon.com/vaccinations/vaccination-schedule.html

"Cheryl Taylor says:
May 1, 2010 at 3:25 pm

It is impossible to give a new "schedule" that should be applied to all children because that is the very basis of the concern – there are different considerations to make for different children. You are making a wise decision to initially delay vaccines on a 5 mo. old preemie. This has obviously been carefully thought through. He has a very immature nervous system that could not react well to an assault to that system. Waiting until a year is an easy to support decision. In that time he will grow a lot and his system will mature remarkably. During those 7 months you can educate yourself further on all the vaccines and search for a Pediatrician or Family Practice Physician that you can have good discussions with about what the choices are and why and when.

If you haven't located your local La Leche League International group I would do so post haste. They are typically a great group of local mothers from whom you can find out the pediatricians in the area that are breastfeeding knowledgeable and supportive of parents who are opting for other than the typical vaccine schedule adherence.

Hope that helps."

Am I being too uncivil, now?

@ Dr. Jay--

Did you not ever see kids die from these now vaccine-preventable diseases during your training and earlier years? Didn't that have ANY impact on you, especially given that the incidence of these diseases went way way way down when vaccines for them came out?

What does it take to get you to understand that infectious diseases don't care about what demographic your patients come from--they can and will infect any and all of us if we let vaccine rates go down.

Dr. Hickle:

Doctors should present all the facts about vaccines and the risks of not vaccinating to their patients. Mention vaccines' common minor adverse reactions and the rarity of truly confirmed severe reactions.

Take the time to discuss diseases and complications and herd immunity. If a parent's conclusions are not in keeping with the way you must practice medicine--in the best interests of that child and the rest of your practice--you can either continue to educate them at the next visit or ask them to see another pediatrician. You can increase the strength of your recommendations with facts and epidemiological data, not anecdotes, and win their trust so they vaccinate as you think they should according to protocols devised by experts.

And your fear of one or two pediatricians who disagree with you should shrink to absolutely zero because you have data and research on your side instead of anecdotes and speculation. And you have earned their trust by being 100% honest with them.

@Jay

Someone having a bad day? Such snark. So unlike you.

It would have been so heartening if you had actually meant all of that instead of taking on a condescending, derogatory air.

Seeing Jay's (#549) put the same comment in two threads, I'll put my reply in both:

“and the rarity of truly confirmed severe reactions.” – and that the rarer severe reactions aren’t cause-and-effect type concerns but are associations that may not be related to the vaccines.

(e.g. recent study showing Guillain–Barré syndrome unlikely to be related to vaccines.)

It must be the altitude, but did Dr. Jay really just ask Dr. Chris to use data and whatnot?

*Makes a right turn on a 270 heading*

Class C airspace is the bane of my existence.

Doctors should present all the facts about vaccines and the risks of not vaccinating to their patients.

So would you object to Vermont's recent watering down of its "philosophical exemption" consent form?

@Todd W: It is not I who is having a bad day. I meant every word I said and I meant it in the most sincere way possible. I can't find the snark that you found.

@Grant: I agree that the G-B incidence might just be background noise, but the increased incidence of narcolepsy is not. http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f794

@Ren @Todd W: Now that's snark, Todd. But dished out in entirely manageable portions.

@Narad: I have absolutely no problem with parents signing a form acknowledging risks and benefits. Unvaccinated children are at greater risk for contracting certain diseases. Parents and doctors who deviate from the usual vaccine schedule must understand that risk and accept it.

California, on the other hand, has completely eliminated the personal beliefs exemption and I object very strongly to that.

Dr. Jay (civilly) debated California Assemblyman/pediatrician Richard Pan who sponsored CA 2109 on a local radio station. The oh so civil Dr. Jay claimed that he would comply with the legislation if it was passed...but Dr. Jay also *mentioned* it is "government intrusion" and he had consulted his attorney about compliance. (IMO, Dr. Jay is espousing a Libertarian viewpoint...in spite of his Twitter
posts that lean toward a Liberal viewpoint.)

BTW, "Autismum" has a great post up on Skeptoid about Wakefield and the Wales measles outbreak...

http://skeptoid.com/blog/2013/04/25/peer-review-and-the-mmr-autism-deba…

California, on the other hand, has completely eliminated the personal beliefs exemption and I object very strongly to that.

I beg your pardon?

Dr. Gordon said on this site

An extremely very small percentage of children who get measles will get complications and a far smaller percentage of these would suffer larger complications but the mortality rate in America in 2011 will still be zero or close to it.

He said on this very page

Enough anecdotal evidence to convince me that 1-2% of children are severely adversely affected by this vaccine.

These are claims he makes here, where there are numerous knowledgeable people to correct his ... uh ... mistaken claims.* Does he make the same sort of ... uh ... mistakes in talking to parents of patients?

And he presumes to school Dr. Hickle that

Doctors should present all the facts about vaccines and the risks of not vaccinating to their patients. Mention vaccines’ common minor adverse reactions and the rarity of truly confirmed severe reactions.

Yes, they should. It's a pity some doctors grossly exaggerate the risks of vaccination and falsely minimize the risks of disease.

* Yes, I know he retracted it here after he took enough flak here.

@LW: The first (typo'd) statement about measles, complications and healthcare in America being sufficient to lead to a zero or nearly zero mortality rate is statistically accurate.

The "1-2%" comment was, I repeat, unsupportable. I said that and retracted the comment. LW, at the risk of sounding uncivil, you're really reaching to criticize me here.

The remainder of your post (#557) about "schooling Dr. Hickie" is wrong. I was saying what I believe. Your comments after that might be your experience but not mine.

@Narad: The California personal beliefs exemption will need to signed by a licensed HCP beginning in January of 2014. It will therefore become a modified medical exemption.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/10/01/governor-jerry-brown-signs…

Jay,

“@Grant: I agree that the G-B incidence might just be background noise, but the increased incidence of narcolepsy is not. http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.f794”

Maybe it’ll prove that way when all is done, but it doesn’t change the point I was making.

Also, personally I wouldn't get ahead of final conclusions, etc.: best not to ride bandwagons until the evidence has played itself out in my experience. There will be things to check out yet I imagine, it's usually the case. (See for example the second response to the article you cite (and presumably criticism elsewhere). Hence why I wrote ‘unlikely’ for the GBS causal link, not definitives like ‘is not’.)

@Jay

I meant every word I said and I meant it in the most sincere way possible. I can’t find the snark that you found.

Sorry, Jay, but given your history, I have a difficult time believing this. You elevated facts and data above anecdotes, something that contradicts your past behavior, where you have elevated your own and parents' anecdotes above the abundance of scientific evidence. Even in this thread, you have placed anecdotes, if not above, at least equal to vast swaths of well-controlled studies.

So, yes, I saw snark and sarcasm there. If you really are sincere, then sorry for any offense, but I will still believe it when I see more evidence that you have changed (e.g., changing your web site to include only scientifically supportable statements about vaccines and following the recommended schedule [barring, of course, legitimate medical contraindications]).

And what Dr Jay means by

California, on the other hand, has completely eliminated the personal beliefs exemption

is that rather large loophole that allows parents to do what every they want in regards to immunizing children who attend school and daycare was tightened by adding a requirement that the decision to take a PBE is discussed with medical practitioner first.
The Governor signed the bill, adding his own little spin to it and I don’t yet know how that’s going to pan out.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/09/jerry-brown-signs-bi…
Quoting linked news article (my emphasis):

Brown noted that AB 2109 does not eliminate parents' current right to exclude their children from vaccinations but attempts to ensure that they have important health information in making that choice.

Please forgive the various typos in my post above. My irritation at Dr Jay's misrepresentation of CA 2109 made me hasty.

The California personal beliefs exemption will need to signed by a licensed HCP beginning in January of 2014. It will therefore become a modified medical exemption.

No, you're talking out of your ass. Have you even read AB 2109? A school nurse can sign off on the form. What hair do you have to split, in order to salvage this position, between California and the loose Vermont requirement that you reject?

@Dr. Gordon, the risk of complications from measles is neither extremely nor very small. It is about one in five. Healthcare in America might manage to keep the mortality low, though I doubt ours is significantly better in that regard than, say, Wales, where's there's already been a fatality, or Britain, where last I heard at least two children were slowly and painfully dying of SSPE. But healthcare in America, or elsewhere, is not able to prevent encephalitis and the potential consequences thereof, like blindness, deafness, and severe brain damage.

It's been frequently commented on this site that antivaxxers regularly discount all damaging effects of disease, no matter how severe, so long as they do not actually immediately kill the patient.

I bring up your prior ... mistakes, shall we say, not to be uncivil but because I assume that you are trying not to embarrass yourself here in front of people who can call you on your ... mistakes ... and I suspect that you make similar claims far more freely in front of people who don't have the knowledge to call you on them. I base this suspicion on the quotations from your speech above.

If I had a child and the pediatrician on whom I relied to keep that child healthy told me that even if he got measles the risk of complications was exceedingly small, whereas the risk of severe adverse effects from the vaccine was 1-2%, I certainly wouldn't get him vaccinated!

I think your mistakes, shall we call them, Dr. Gordon, are extremely damaging, and I think the fact that your statements of the risks of both disease and vaccine are mistaken should be made exceedingly clear. Possibly you will cease to make such, ah, mistakes, but even if you do not, perhaps someone who might be tempted to believe you will see your statements debunked.

Repeatedly.

Dr Jay

It will therefore become a modified medical exemption.

Modified medical exemption? Hardly. That suggests there’s a medical reason behind your exemption. Parents are still entitled to go with “I don’t want to vaccinate” without a medical reason. The difference is that now they’ll have to say “I don’t want to” to a medical professional who can discuss the risks and benefits of that decision with them, instead of saying “I don’t want to” to a school employee whose job is to file paperwork.

LW: Healthcare in America might manage to keep the mortality low..
You mean the 'health care system' smothered under corporations..yeah, I wouldn't bet on that.

I don't know what's wrong with all you Jay Gordon-bashers.

Jay has retracted one of his foolish antivax claims (about measles complications). He's said he was wrong - repeatedly! And yet you won't back off any of your evidence-based opinions about vaccination!

How are we supposed to build a bridge to the antivax camp when we won't alter facts to obtain better relations?

This is just going to force Jay and his allies to come up with new nonsense that they can blame on our intransigence.

Sad, very sad. :(

I'm not intransigent, according to Jay.

"I find lilady’s comments and demeanor very threatening. If someone like her were talking to you as she is talking to me, I think you’d feel threatened."

I can hardly wait for Jay's next book co-authored with Miss Manners, to teach me how to engage him *civilly* and with the proper *demeanor* so that Jay doesn't feel *threatened*.

@Bacon: Thank you for your kind words. A bridge indeed! Or at the very least a small catwalk.
(My snark detector is in the shop so all I read I spun for good.)

@Narad: No I'm not "talking out of [my] ass.

AB2109 . . . 75% of CA schools do not have school nurses. That's 3 out of 4 or so of the 10,000+ schools in the state. Parents will have to deal with . . . intransigent doctors when they request this waiver. Preschools don't have school nurses either. I predict a bit of a mess.

Measles has a very low complication rate and and even lower severe complication rate. And an exceedingly low mortality rate. I gave two MMR vaccines yesterday to families gong to Wales.

I have noticed that when the facts do begin to fail you, many of you resort to statements like "talking out your ass" or similar. Why is that?

Jay: "many of you resort to statements like “talking out your ass” or similar. Why is that?"

Jay: "Measles has a very low complication rate and and even lower severe complication rate."

CDC: "About 30% of measles cases develop one or more complications, including

"Pneumonia, which is the complication that is most often the cause of death in young children.
Ear infections occur in about 1 in 10 measles cases and permanent loss of hearing can result.
Diarrhea is reported in about 8% of cases."

"These complications are more common among children under 5 years of age and adults over 20 years old."

"Even in previously healthy children, measles can be a serious illness requiring hospitalization. As many as 1 out of every 20 children with measles gets pneumonia, and about 1 child in every 1,000 who get measles will develop encephalitis."

http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html

Any other questions, Jay?

@Dangerous Bacon

Hey, now. Don't go quoting facts at Dr. Jay. I mean, 8% is "very low" compared to, say something that causes complications at anear-100% rate, like rabies. Let's keep some perspective, here!

And Jay, comments like yours show that, once again, you are not sincere about sticking to reality and facts. How is it a modified medical exemption? Where does the medical contraindication come into play? Here's the full text of AB2109. Can you point me to where, in the bill, philosophical exemptions are entirely eliminated, as you suggest?

Dr. Gordon:

Measles has a very low complication rate and and even lower severe complication rate. And an exceedingly low mortality rate. I gave two MMR vaccines yesterday to families gong to Wales.

Please provide a citation. How low is low? Why is putting one in ten in the hospital as what is happening in Wales considered very low?

AB2109 . . . 75% of CA schools do not have school nurses. That’s 3 out of 4 or so of the 10,000+ schools in the state. Parents will have to deal with . . . intransigent doctors when they request this waiver. Preschools don’t have school nurses either. I predict a bit of a mess.

Awww, poor little speshul snowflake parents are going to have to take a bit of time away from admiring their perfect spawn and parenting to get a doctor, or even naturopath to sign a waiver.

Measles has a very low complication rate and and even lower severe complication rate. And an exceedingly low mortality rate.

Oh FFS, you go from claiming a 1-2% serious adverse reaction rate from the vaccine, which you rightfully retracted to this tripe. Is this what you tell your patients' parents? Have you given the impression that they are so speshul their little snowflakes will undoubtedly avoid complications from VPDs?

I gave two MMR vaccines yesterday to families gong to Wales.

I trust you told them that it takes 2-4 weeks for protective antibody to be produced?

I have noticed that when the facts do begin to fail you, many of you resort to statements like “talking out your ass” or similar. Why is that?

Actually you have that bass-ackwards; when you fail to adhere to facts and let such stupid statements such as "effectively a medical exemption" flop out of your mouth, it becomes a statement of fact that you are 'talking out of your ass'. It's still a philosophical exemption and just because entitled little prat parents have to get a healthcare professional (which is loosely termed), doesn't magically make it a medical exemption.

500+ comments. Well, it looks like somebody's practice is slow this week . . .

75% of CA schools do not have school nurses. That’s 3 out of 4 or so of the 10,000+ schools in the state.

Care to support that statement? The NASN estimates (PDF) that "32.08% of California’s
schools have full-time RNs, while another 41.5% have part-time RNs." Part-time is more than adequate for this purpose.

Parents will have to deal with . . . intransigent doctors when they request this waiver.

Or naturopaths. I certainly hope that by inserting "intransigent" you're not trying to raise the bugaboo of doctors whimsically refusing to sign the form.

I predict a bit of a mess.

I'm tempted to predict that you will promptly forget this prediction if it fails to pan out.

I have noticed that when the facts do begin to fail you, many of you resort to statements like “talking out your ass” or similar.

What facts failed me, Jay? You were talking out of your ass. California has not "completly eliminated the personal beliefs exemption." It is not a "modified medical exemption," a concept that was similarly brought forth into the world courtesy of your tokhes.

And I would note that you have failed to explain how it is that you find the Vermont exemption unacceptable when it is less burdensome than the California one.

@Narad

Wait...you mean that just like with the 1%-2% adverse event rate for MMR, that Jay's 75% figure for schools that do not have a nurse was also made up out of whole cloth? You mean that it's actually close to 75% of schools that do have a nurse, at least part time?

Surely you must be mistaken. Jay doesn't make things up or talk out of his ass.

So? no google hangout?

Alain

Oh, and this statement is also overbroad:

Preschools don’t have school nurses either.

It is trivial to find preschool programs operated by school districts who have a nurse on staff. One further item that you seem to be ignoring is that this law in large part merely evens the playing field, as people without frivolous objections are still stuck with obtaining a copy of the immunization record on top of the burden of obtaining the shots in the first place.

Pareidolius: "500+ comments. Well, it looks like somebody’s practice is slow this week . . ."

What's actually happening is a deliberate ploy by Jay Gordon to drive up traffic to Respectful Insolence. Orac kicks a percentage of the Scienceblogs payoff back to Jay.

I mean, these are _doctors_ we're talking about. They're capable of anything. And you can't prove it isn't true.

@Dangerous Bacon: Thank you for the data. As always, I listen and learn. Pneumonia occurs in 5% of measles cases. Diarrhea 8%. The CDC's statement about ear infections (7%) and permanent hearing loss is a wrong-headed attempt to scare parents. State the facts and most people will choose to get the vaccine. Exaggerate and use scare tactics and you lose people's confidence and provoke over-reaction from anti-vaccine or vaccine-ambivalent parents and others.

I'm also a little tired of being called anti-vaccine. It's inaccurate. I am always willingly cop to the epithet of "anti-schedule."

@Todd W: The exemption requires medical approval now. There are no philosophical objections allowed without a doctor's or other approved HCP's signature.

@Chris: See above.

@Science Mom: Yes, each of my patients is unique. I like the word snowflake. Special, wonderful children. The same way other pediatricians look at their patients and the way parents view their own children. You disagree?

@Narad: Really? A 2007 paper. Since then California's budget cuts have been severe.

This is a 2011 note:
"California, once a leader in student healthcare, now ranks among the 10 worst states in the country, averaging one nurse for every 2,187 students in 2009, according to NASN."
And this from 2010: "On any given day, there are about 7,000 schools throughout the state where a nurse is not present, and about half of California's school districts have no nurses at all. California ranks behind 40 other states in the school nurse-to-student ratio."

Access to school nurses is limited, doctors who will sign the exemption will be in short supply and there are countless preschools without a nurse.

@Alain: Let me know and I'll be there.

@Bacon! If we hit 600 I get a free gym bag and one month's free membership.

I’m also a little tired of being called anti-vaccine. It’s inaccurate.

Sorry, Dr. Jay, but you've earned the title over the eight years or so that I've known you online. It is an accurate description of you.

@ORAC: No, I haven't and you know it.

You're an honest man and the statement above doesn't suit you. You don't need to play to your base constantly. It would take courage for you to admit that there nuances in this discussion that are worth considering instead of being unscientifically rigid.

@ORAC: No, I haven't and you know it.

Dr. Jay, that was an honest statement of my opinion. You might not like it, just as I don't like your implication that I am somehow lying or "playing to my base." My assessment might piss you off, but you've given me no reason to reassess it that I've seen. Moreover, I'm not alone, either Steve Novella, who is much less—shall we say?—insolent than I am, agrees:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/dr-jay-gordon-anti-vaccin…

"Measles has a very low complication rate and and even lower severe complication rate. And an exceedingly low mortality rate."

He keeps saying it! No matter how many times he's been corrected over the years, and even on this thread, he keeps saying it!

Maybe this is a Turing test. Can we tell that we're interacting with a poorly programmed bot?

Novella 2008

You know, Dave, perhaps your ideas are rigid and unchanging, but mine are not. I'm sure in 2008 I could have been heard to say that formaldehyde in vaccines is dangerous. Again, I listen, I learn and perhaps you just can't relate to that kind of critical thinking.

@Science Mom: Yes, each of my patients is unique. I like the word snowflake. Special, wonderful children. The same way other pediatricians look at their patients and the way parents view their own children. You disagree?

Yes, I disagree when practices like yours cater to the Mummy Wars and rearing the bestest child who will undoubtedly usher in the Great Utopia off the backs of everyone else in society. I want a paediatrician who is knowledgeable and competent, with whom I participate in my children's healthcare, not some flaccid mediocre doctor who gives very bad preventative health advice and is more interested in being avant garde than telling parents what they need to know.

Really? A 2007 paper. Since then California’s budget cuts have been severe.

So document your claim.

Quoth Dr. Gordon:

The CDC’s statement about ear infections (7%) and permanent hearing loss is a wrong-headed attempt to scare parents.... Exaggerate and use scare tactics and you lose people’s confidence...

"Exaggerate and use scare tactics"? Would that be like claiming "1-2% of children are severely adversely affected by this vaccine" in an attempt to scare people away from the MMR?

So, what's wrong with "the CDC’s statement about ear infections (7%) and permanent hearing loss"? Is that number incorrect? Does Dr. Gordon have an actual basis for saying that that number is incorrect?

Or does Dr. Gordon just object to the reporting of an accurate number because people might start wondering if they have been misinformed about the risks of measles?

Now he'll say I'm uncivil again for questioning his pronouncement ex cathedra.

Dr. Gordon, at the moment one in ten who have measles in Wales are being hospitalized. It is most likely because they have pneumonia.

Now, again, provide a real citation showing that measles complications are very low. Perhaps something like this: The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review. Look at Table 2 which is titled "Complications by age for reported measles cases, United States, 1987–2000." It notes that 29% had complications, including pneumonia, encephalitis and death.

How high do the percentages for encephalitis, pneumonia and death have to be for them to not be "low"?

Earlier, Jay, you were trumpeting a serious adverse reaction rate to measles vaccine of 1-2% (before you backed off this claim).You thought that figure was significant - now you're trivializing an actual pneumonia risk of several times that level in measles patients. To remind you, the CDC (whose information you deride in favor of your unsubstantiated anecdotes) cites a 30% complication rate in measles.

One fifth of measles patients in the U.K. from January through March of this year required hospitalization. Does that sound like an insignificant rate of complications to you?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22276975

Jay: "State the facts and most people will choose to get the vaccine."

Yes, they will. Trivialize the risks and pull false claims out of your butt, and most people will regard you as foolish and uninformed.

@Chris: "Dr. Gordon, at the moment one in ten who have measles in Wales are being hospitalized. It is most likely because they have pneumonia."

Can you document that?

Just kidding, Chris, just kidding.

Jay: "You know, Dave, perhaps your ideas are rigid and unchanging, but mine are not. I’m sure in 2008 I could have been heard to say that formaldehyde in vaccines is dangerous. Again, I listen, I learn and perhaps you just can’t relate to that kind of critical thinking."

Did I call it or what? Jay is annoyed because every once in a while he'll drop one of his idiotic antivax claims (and expect a big pat on the back), while we're so "rigid and unchanging" that we won't discard facts in favor of lurid anecdotes.

@Dr. Jay - I think what annoys up the most is that you are a doctor, treating actual children based on ideas that have no basis in fact or evidence to support them.

Dr. Gordon, here is the page from the National Health Service in Wales:
http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sitesplus/863/page/66210

There in the title is says "There is currently a major measles outbreak in the Swansea and Neath Port Talbot area: 942 cases, 83 hospitalised."

Now high do the complications have to be for them to go from "low" to "high"? Since the the USA data shows 29%, would that number have to be 40% for you to be concerned?

@Dangerous Bacon:

To remind you, the CDC (whose information you deride in favor of your unsubstantiated anecdotes) cites a 30% complication rate in measles.

This time he didn't even do that. He just baldly claimed they were exaggerating and acting in a "wrong-headed" fashion. This time he didn't even pretend to have a basis for his pronouncement ex cathedra.

Jay has had some slow days at the office...so now he's giving medical advice on his "twitter" page. He doesn't "recommend Gardasil vaccine for boys".

https://twitter.com/JayGordonMDFAAP

Is my "demeanor" too "uncivil"?

I feel threatened.

Did anyone else find Dr Jay's comment at #592 offensively flippant? Because I certainly did.

@ Dangerous Bacon: Threatened by me...I'll *try* to be less threatening. :-)

@ Christine (the public servant Christine): Jay is NEVER flippant (offensively or otherwise). He's the doyen of professionalism, civility and knowledge.

Jay #569,

“Measles has a very low complication rate and and even lower severe complication rate. And an exceedingly low mortality rate.”

I’ll let others continue with that one (I have work to get to), but I disagree.

”I gave two MMR vaccines yesterday to families gong to Wales.

On the face of it, you seem to have the idea that vaccines should be treated like travel vaccinations, only given when the person is heading to an area the disease has re-emerged. That doesn’t fit what vaccination programmes address for illnesses that have widespread sources, such as measles. According to others, you have a similar thinking on tetanus vaccination.

“I have noticed that when the facts do begin to fail you, many of you resort to statements like “talking out your ass” or similar. Why is that?”

Silly game to play. (And wrong-headed.)

#580:

“The CDC’s statement about ear infections (7%) and permanent hearing loss is a wrong-headed attempt to scare parents.”

No, it’s not. Amazing to read a doctor say that, a pediatrician at that too.

#586: “You know, Dave, perhaps your ideas are rigid and unchanging, but mine are not. I’m sure in 2008 I could have been heard to say that formaldehyde in vaccines is dangerous. Again, I listen, I learn and perhaps you just can’t relate to that kind of critical thinking.”

If you had good sense, then, you’d recognise yourself as putting out anti-vaccine memes and trying to "out-do" medical research and having been wrong. That would be a (strong) hint to stop trying to "out-do" medical research, an indication you’re not really up to it. And as I wrote earlier, while you might well apply what you find that way to yourself, I doubt you have a place to apply it to those in your care.

#592: A tit-for-tat reply rather than address the question raised?

Guess I’ll move to more greener pastures.

lilady #597 - the recent results from Australia report a screening or herd effect is working well for boys there. I have no idea about the financial cost/benefit aspects, but you’d think vaccinating the boys should/could produce a stronger protective effect.

Let me give a wee shout-out for our new immunisation blogger at sciblogs - the head of NZ’s Immunisation Advisory Centre at the University of Auckland. Nice blog title too, Diplomatic Immunity.

- Avoid substantive questions.
- Admit to being irrational but refuse to address it.
- Accuse anyone who follows up on evasion of incivility.

I am truly in the wrong racket. A monkey can do this.

So document your claim.

Fine, I'll do it. One does have this NASN press release (PDF) placing California at a 1:2187 nurse-to-student ratio. I imagine the underlying source is buried somewhere on their site, but they don't exactly make it easy.

One further finds in the commentary to 2012's Assembly Joint Resolution 24 (which itself asserts a 1:4000 ratio out of nowhere) the statement that "according to Children Now, only 17% of California's schools have a school nurse or school health center." I can find no such data in their 2012–2013 scorecard; it does appear in their 2010 scorecard (http://goo.gl/D1Lh7). Looking at the documentation, one finds that

Includes the percentage of schools estimated to have a school nurse or school health center. This indicator is created by combining county-level data that includes the number of school nurses and the number of school health centers as a proportion of all public schools within a county. Because data are obtained at the county- as opposed to school- level, it is possible to get an over count. Data for this indicator come from the California Department of Education and the California School Health Centers Association. Children Now analysis of the California Department of Education, DataQuest, County-Level Analysis of 2008-2009 data for “Number of pupil services staff by type, with county data” and “Number of schools per county,” and California School Health Centers Association, 2009 “School-based health centers by county,” (May 2010).

In other words, they're pretending that it's one nurse to one school.

So, the upshot of this exercise? (1) Yes, California school nurses are stretched very thin, impairing their ability to serve as facilitators for seekers of frivolous exemptions (although one might like to see the county-level breakdown for where those exemptions are coming from to compute a more useful metric). (2) It still is just a leveling of the playing field.

While waiting for my previous comment to come out of moderation (forgot to obscure the third link), I'll note that the URLs in the Children Now documentation section were digested by WP.

The CDC’s statement about ear infections (7%) and permanent hearing loss is a wrong-headed attempt to scare parents.”

I would show this comment to my youngest brother (measles at age 6, hearing aids in both ears) but I don't want him to put his fist through my laptop.

@Jay

@Todd W: The exemption requires medical approval now. There are no philosophical objections allowed without a doctor’s or other approved HCP’s signature.

No, it doesn't. The professional does not need to agree with the parents' decisions at all. They merely need to give them information about the risks and benefits of both vaccination and refusing vaccination. You seem to think that physicians left, right and center will be refusing to sign the form. Yet you have no basis for that claim.

You see, statements like that (that doctors need to "approve" the exemption) are the kinds of things that earn you the "anti-vaccine" label. If you don't want to be called anti-vaccine, then stop promoting anti-vaccine nonsense.

Also, it doesn't help that you (excuse the language) make s**t up, assert it as fact, then go "oh, yeah, I take that back" when you get called on it, only to say the same damn things (or similar) again later.

#597 Interesting. I would hope most boys and men would want to avoid harming women by giving them cancer-causing diseases.

Question: Can someone explain to me whether there is any evidence that vaccines are riskier and cause more complications at younger ages?

I know that's the too-soon part of the "too many too soon" anti-vaccination argument (which I don't buy, but also haven't seen a lot of evidence on yet).

That over-the-internet advice seems to mean that Dr. Jay is sexist...or he just isn't up on the recommendations from the CDC and the AAP about protecting both sexes and their partners from cervical and penile cancers.

@ Khani: There's a new study out about local reactions at the site of IM vaccine injections (administering in thigh muscle versus arm deltoid muscle)...which confirms that local reactions following IM administration of vaccines is much less for shots in the thigh, for infants 0-36 months of age.

http://www.grouphealthresearch.org/news-and-events/newsrel/2013/130114…

It's sad now, that parent of children ages 6-12 months are advised to get their babies immunized against measles in contemplation of travel to the U.K. and European countries, where measles is endemic...especially because those recommendations are now the same for travel to underdeveloped areas of the world. The U.K. declared endemic-free for measles in 1994 and lost that WHO designation in 2008.

Infants who are immunized against measles between 6-12 months of age, will still require both shots of the 2-dose series, given after their first birthday.

Narad @578 and 588
Actually, Dr Jay might have a point here. You’re not from California, are you?
First of all:

people without frivolous objections are still stuck with obtaining a copy of the immunization record on top of the burden of obtaining the shots in the first place.

The parents are given their copy of the immunization card (yellow card) at their first well baby visit. Parents are expected to bring the yellow card to each subsequent visit, so that both sets of records (the doc’s and ours) are updated when the shots are given. The only burden on the parents is remembering to bring in the card along with the kid, and not losing it (the state will charge you $10 to replace it). Oh, the burden of making a photocopy – of the yellow card already in their possession - for the school records.

But the school nurse issue: in my local area, there are concerns that a lot of school nurses have been pink slipped along with the teachers in the last several years of our dismal economy.
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2012/nov/15/school-nurses-spread-thin-staffing…
Yeah, I did Dr Jay’s homework for him. That’s because it is a real concern for parents.

You also claimed:

It is trivial to find preschool programs operated by school districts who have a nurse on staff.

Really? In Southern California? Show me.

To my knowledge, the preschool programs run by my school district are for children who need early intervention, or are need-based.

The typical moderate income family sends their children to private preschools. Those typically do not include a staff nurse. And, no, I cannot provide one single link to demonstrate that.

Todd W @606

Also, it doesn’t help that you (excuse the language) make s**t up, assert it as fact, then go “oh, yeah, I take that back” when you get called on it, only to say the same damn things (or similar) again later.

Sort of like the late Duane "Bullfrog" Gish of Gish Gallop fame.

Did Dr Jay just call Orac unscientific? What an arrogant passive-aggressive pratt.

If anyone wants a lesson in constructive incivility, I recommend this

http://deadspin.com/5941348/they-wont-magically-turn-you-into-a-lustful…

Wow Militant Agnostic...what took you so long to produce this open letter?

I believe wholeheartedly in constructive incivility...especially when it applies to to the oh so civil, Dr. Jay, who is the poster child for for the not-so-subtle spreading of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt about childhood immunizations.

Poor Jay, he's out of his element here and he definitely doesn't like the fact that we have all called him out on his ignorance of basic science and label him as the liar he is. He's no better than the creepy slimy group of *journalists* at AoA, who defame our most respected doctors, researchers, scientists and science bloggers. He's too f*cking stupid to realize how each and every comment he has made in the past and continues to post, only confirms the sheer unadulterated ignorant crank poster he has become.

Vaccine Proponents Playbook, Argument Seven: The Wakefield Card

No matter how well reasoned and logical an anti-vaxxers arguments are, always rebut them by reminding them that Wakefield was discredited. For instance, they say that tens of thousands of parents report their child dramatically regressed into autism following vaccination. You remind them that Wakefield was discredited. They say that the autism explosion coincides precisely with the expanded vaccination schedule. Again, you remind them that Wakefield was discredited. They say that autistics have seizures, brain inflammation and other autoimmune issues that vaccines are known to cause, vaccine courts compensate for damages leading to autism, vaccines have never been tested for their long-term safety… (You know!)

Typical.

Dr. Jay manufacturers an inflated figure of 1-2% complication rate from measles vaccination, yet poo-poos the data based measles complication rate of 30% from the CDC.

It's not just the CDC data - 25% of the folks in Europe who contracted measles ended up in the hospital too, as per the WHO - and there were 6 deaths in France alone (out of ~14,000 measles cases) in 2011. 90% of those cases were in folks who weren't vaccinated or had no reported vaccination history.

Source: http://www.euro.who.int/en/what-we-publish/information-for-the-media/se…

You are endangering the very people you're supposed to be protecting with your anti-vaccine rhetoric.

@Greg - anti-vaccine playbook canard #1 - set fire to numerous strawman arguments in an attempt to seem like they have a case, when in actuality, no scientific evidence exists to support any of their claims.

@Greg: " For instance, they say that tens of thousands of parents report their child dramatically regressed into autism following vaccination."

So they say. Produce evidence of these tens of thousands.

That over-the-internet advice seems to mean that Dr. Jay is sexist…or he just isn’t up on the recommendations from the CDC and the AAP about protecting both sexes and their partners from cervical and penile cancers.

HPV is also implicated in a large proportion of oropharyngeal and anal cancers in men as well as women. I will be charitable and suggest that Dr. Jay is not up to speed on HPV-induced malignancies. After all, it would be most uncivil to suggest that he is not only sexist, but also homophobic, right?

Greg,

No matter how well reasoned and logical an anti-vaxxers arguments are, always rebut them by reminding them that Wakefield was discredited.

You have well reasoned and logical arguments? Why not show us some instead of the fact-free drivel you keep posting here?

Greg:

Vaccine Proponents Playbook, Argument Seven: The Wakefield Card

Why should he matter anymore. He has had his fifteen minutes, and his paper on only twelve cases that showed nothing on any of at least four different MMR vaccines was retracted.

You continue:

hey say that autistics have seizures, brain inflammation and other autoimmune issues that vaccines are known to cause,

This is actually a claim that needs to be compared to actually getting measles. Greg, please provide the PubMed indexed study showing us that the MMR vaccine that has been used in the USA since 1971 causes more seizures than measles.

Greg, I will give you a bit of help. Go to my comment #591 and click on the "Clinical Significance of Measles" link. In it you will read:

Febrile seizures. Febrile seizures occur in 0.1%–2.3% of children with measles in the United States and England [75, 77, 124–127] and are usually benign and not associated with residual damage.

But then it continues:

Postinfectious encephalomyelitis (PIE) occurs in 13 per 1000 infected persons, usually 3–10 days after onset of rash [39, 131].....snip... As many as 25% of people with PIE due to measles die, and ∼33% of survivors have lifelong neurological sequelae, including severe retardation, motor impairment, blindness, and sometimes hemiparesis [39, 131].

Now, all you have to do is show that the MMR vaccine is more dangerous than measles. Here are some examples of the type of acceptable citations:

Vaccine. 2012 Jun 13;30(28):4292-8. Epub 2012 Apr 20.
The combined measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines and the total number of vaccines are not associated with development of autism spectrum disorder: The first case-control study in Asia.

Vaccine. 2012 Jan 5;30(2):247-53.
Lack of association between childhood immunizations and encephalitis in California, 1998-2008.

Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2010 May;29(5):397-400.
Lack of association between measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and autism in children: a case-control study.

PLoS ONE 2008; 3(9): e3140 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003140
Lack of Association between Measles Virus Vaccine and Autism with Enteropathy: A Case-Control Study.

Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2006 Sep;25(9):768-73.
Encephalopathy after whole-cell pertussis or measles vaccination: lack of evidence for a causal association in a retrospective case-control study.

Greg, Why the h*ll are you still commenting here? You've proven time and time again to not listen to what we say and instead, parroting the same playbook again. Look like it's a game between you and the other commenter here...

Alain

@Chemmomo:

Actually, Dr Jay might have a point here.

I conceded much of this in #604, which is now out of moderation.

You also claimed:

It is trivial to find preschool programs operated by school districts who have a nurse on staff.

Really? In Southern California? Show me.

When I said "trivial," I meant that I readily found examples of district-run preschools with nurses on-line, not that it was trivial to enroll in one. This was a counterexample to Dr. Jay's blanket assertion that they don't exist at all. I did not try to break these out into Title 5 preschools.

And no, I'm not in California.

Almost forgot:

Oh, the burden of making a photocopy – of the yellow card already in their possession – for the school records.

Fair enough. One still has the burden of getting the shots in the first place; I've certainly seen my share of MDC types who avoid well-baby visits on the basis that they exist only to push vaccines.

And, today's AoA headliner from Olmsted:

http://www.ageofautism.com/2013/04/weekly-wrap-autism-science-autopsies…

Here Dan mentions Joan Campbell's "wonderful" website with parent testimonials about their childrens' immediate descent into autism, following immunizations. Did Olmsted *forget* to mention that Campbell a.k.a "redrockcloud" is a paid employee of the Autism Media Channel (co-owned by Wakefield and Polly Tommey?)

https://sites.google.com/site/redrockcloud/about-me

Take a look at "Greg's" lame comment...

"With the Swansea measles outbreak wouldn't this be a fine time for provaxxers to show how measles are such a scourge and give us the figures of the health outcomes of those who came down with the illness. Yes, we know one individual with the measles died, although it is not certain whether measles was the cause. How are the others doing? HHHMMMM!!!

Posted by: Greg | April 27, 2013 at 09:17 AM"

@ Greg: Chris has provided you with information (about) "how the others are doing" HHHMMMM!!!!!!!!!

Hello Greg. Back for another kicking?
Stick around. It's going to be fun to use you as a chew toy.

I just cannot resist linking to the website set up by Wakefield's employee (Joan Campbell), of 900+ parents' vaccine damage "testimonials" that Olmsted refers to:

http://www.followingvaccinations.com/home

(You'll find many of the AoA groupies have posted there.)

Um, Greg, you are denigrating Orac for not wanting to do a live debate where the rules allow a Gish Gallop. Yet, here, you are asked a simple question and you refuse to answer. For almost two weeks.

And it is not even something difficult, plus he had at least ten days to find an answer!

Come on, Greg, answer my question: provide the PubMed indexed study that shows the American MMR causes more seizures than actually getting measles.

I have given you a link to the "Clinical Significance of Measles",, and surely you know how to use PubMed. So just provide us the PubMed indexed papers where the MMR vaccine with the Jeryl Lynn mumps component causes more seizures than measles.

Lilady; I can assure you that Joan Campbell is not redrockcloud nor is she a paid employee of Andrew Wakefield or the Autism Media Channel. Thanks for putting up the links though.

Not according to Ginger Taylor...

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2011/06/joan-campbell-has-gather…

Joan Campbell Has Gathered Vaccine Injury Stories
Last fall, Joan Campbell began asking parents:

"I am compiling a list of children who were adversely affected by any vaccine. Please if you could say in about 4-6 sentences what that vaccine was, how they reacted, how they are today and what city the vaccine was administered."

Joan had received more than 900 responses so far. She has posted them here:

http://www.followingvaccinations.com/

Thank you Joan for telling the story that health authorities are doing their damnedest to bury.

If you have not yet submitted your story, you can do so at admin@followingvaccinations.com
Posted by Ginger Taylor at Saturday, June 25, 2011"

Why did you delete the section "about me" on your website, 13 hours ago?

https://sites.google.com/site/redrockcloud/system/app/pages/recentChang…

Long comment (too many links), held in moderation

Just go to Ginger Taylor's blog about Joan Campbell.

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2011/06/joan-campbell-has-gather…

Joan Campbell *might be* another Joan Campbell, a crank poster on AoA, who is from Scotland and who claims her child is vaccine-injured.

BTW, *someone* changed (deleted) the "about" section on the website I linked to, 13 hours ago, just after I posted my comment at #628 above

http://www.followingvaccinations.com/home

Now Greg is just making excuses. He refuses to provide any real evidence for his claims, nor answer my very simple question.

And now Brave Sir Greg has run away... again.

Why did you delete the section “about me” on your website, 13 hours ago?

This would seem to be a pertinent question.

Lilady; I can assure you that Joan Campbell is not redrockcloud nor is she a paid employee of Andrew Wakefield or the Autism Media Channel

Joan Campbell's FB page says otherwise:
http://www.facebook.com/AutismMothers/posts/146229648862377

From the cached version of the disappeared Redrockcloud "About me" section:
I am currently Admin at Autism Mothers on Facebook for The Autism File and Autism Media Channel.

The AutismMedia twitter account definitely associates itself with Joan Campbell.

From the cached version of the disappeared Redrockcloud “About me” section:

Their "disclaimer" is hilarious:

By using our website, you accept this disclaimer in full. If you disagree with any part of this disclaimer, you must not use our website....

You must not....

• Refer to this site as anti-vaccine or scaremongering
• Belittle parents with scientific logic
• Let your ego get in the way of rational decisions
• Accept any percentage loss for the greater good of all

I have a question for Greg, too - what do you say to the tens of thousands of parents of autistics kids, who when they got the diagnosis, could see many retrospective signs of their children's autism, that had nothing to do with their vaccinations? Autismum is one who springs to mind here, I'm sure there are other regular commenters on this blog who are the same.

May I innocently add that no anti-vaxxers ever questioned me about the vaccines I've got and when I got them too. Do you all want to know?

Alain

what do you say to the tens of thousands of parents of autistics kids, who when they got the diagnosis, could see many retrospective signs of their children’s autism, that had nothing to do with their vaccinations?

Personal anecdote here: my mother suspected there was something different about me when I was about a month old. I would stiffen when she reached out to pick me up. I still have high tactile sensitivity.

Alain,
Something tells me that what you're going to tell us will be quite amusing. Go for it.

You must not….
• Accept any percentage loss for the greater good of all

Obviously, they’re not Star Trek fans.

I want to know too, Alain!

I'm not sure how Dr. Gordon can quote a 1-2% measles complication rate when, if memory serves, 1 of the 11 children who contracted measles from Dr. Bob's unvaccinated patient spreading it in a pediatric waiting room wound up hospitalized. (http://justthevax.blogspot.com/2011/04/2008-measles-in-dr-bob-sears-wai… --thanks lilady!)

That's more like 10% complication rate right there.

Chris Hickie, MD PhD

I didn't get any vaccine before school age (1st & 2nd years primary school) and during that time, I was getting my schooling in an hospital and doing my assessment.

Before that, I was in regular kindergarten and it was probably when they noticed there was a problems with my development.

Alain

@ Chris Hickie:

"I’m not sure how Dr. Gordon can quote a 1-2% measles complication rate when, if memory serves, 1 of the 11 children who contracted measles from Dr. Bob’s unvaccinated patient spreading it in a pediatric waiting room wound up hospitalized. (http://justthevax.blogspot.com/2011/04/2008-measles-in-dr-bob-sears-wai… –thanks lilady!)

(Pardon my demeanor and incivility)

The answer Dr. Chris, is that Dr. Jay makes sh!t up:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/measles/fs-parents.html

"How serious is measles?

Measles can be dangerous, especially for babies and young children. In the United States in 2011, 42% of children under 5 years old who had measles had to be treated in the hospital.

For some children, measles can lead to pneumonia, a serious lung infection. It can also cause lifelong brain damage, deafness, and even death. One to three out of 1,000 children in the U.S. who get measles will die from the disease, even with the best care. About 150,000 to 175,000 people die from measles each year around the world—mostly in places where children do not get the measles vaccine."

@Dr. Hickie, I'm afraid you misremember Dr. Gordon's statements. He said,

#401:

MMR: Enough anecdotal evidence to convince me that 1-2% of children are severely adversely affected by this vaccine.

#569:

Measles has a very low complication rate and and even lower severe complication rate. And an exceedingly low mortality rate.

One would suppose that "a very low complication rate and and even lower severe complication rate" would mean even less than 1-2% severe complications, but as you pointed out the rate of complications in that one outbreak was enough to put 1/11 in the hospital.

Just resurecting this thread for a cookie :)

Alain

Measles can be dangerous, especially for babies and young children. In the United States in 2011, 42% of children under 5 years old who had measles had to be treated in the hospital.

Let's not forget that children less than 2 years old have an increased risk of SSPE when infected with measles. The risk increases to 1:2000 and most of the infected in Wales have been infants less than a year old.

@ Science Mom: Don't be so "shy" when crediting yourself and Catherina for the many posts on your blog about SSPE:

http://justthevax.blogspot.com/2012/09/olmsted-cant-find-sspe-either.ht…

"Doctors" Conrick and Olmsted discuss syphilis paresis here...

http://www.ageofautism.com/2013/04/searching-for-autisms-virginia-1.htm…

"...Dan also shared about GPI, General Paralysis of the Insane, a horrific neurodegenerative disease that had quite an interesting story. GPI historically was seen as the end result of the sexually transmitted disease syphilis, a sly spirochete bacteria very similar to the spirochete of Lyme bacteria today, sickening the brain and rendering its victim slowly insane, finally losing the ability to talk, walk or recognize anyone. Yet Dan and Mark's research showed that GPI only seemed to occur in syphilis patients who had been treated with mercury, a standard of care for centuries up to the era of antibiotics that arrived with penicillin in the 1940s. Like acrodynia in childhood, a disease connected to mercury in teething powders, GPI began to disappear when antibiotics took over as the treatment of choice. It seemed to be a possible interaction between the microbe of syphilis and mercury that sparked GPI. State mental institutions around the country had thousands of GPI patients, often for years, as their insanity whittled them down to a shell of their former selves...."

Continue reading to see that Dr. Conrick's grandfather died of neurosyphilis...which was *caused* by *mercury poisoning*.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1169231-overview

One bizarro-world aspect of that AoA article was the contention that Virginia, the "Original Autism Child" was exposed to mercury partly because her parents were orchid enthusiasts and supposedly treated/sprayed their plants for pests with mercury compound(s).

I have never heard of this being done by orchid growers, even as far back as the '30s and '40s - copper or even arsenic-based pesticides, maybe, but not mercury.

AoA could always come back and insist that the parents used tons of thermometers to keep track of orchid greenhouse temperatures and lots of mercury leached out of them. That makes about as much sense.

Yet Dan and Mark’s research showed that GPI only seemed to occur in syphilis patients who had been treated with mercury, a standard of care for centuries up to the era of antibiotics that arrived with penicillin in the 1940s.

To everyone's surprise, this is completely untrue. For 30 years syphilis was treated with Salvarsan rather than with mercury compounds, and GPI did not go away (see, for instance, Oliver Sacks).

GPI historically was seen as the end result of the sexually transmitted disease syphilis

Sadly, no. The 'syphilis' explanation was not accepted until quite late.

Are there an MDs in this thread? If so, I have a question for you.

Jay

@Jay -

If so, I have a question for you.

Any reason not to just ask?

Are there an MDs in this thread?

Yes. (Tips: 1. search the page. 2. You might be forgetting Orac is a doctor…?)

This article and many of the comments are the biggest wall of text that could ever threaten a perfectly good sunny Saturday afternoon.

I can however say that although many people strongly argue for their respective decisions based on scientific data this debate is as much political. So take a deep breath, go outside and play.

Thanks for the update. I'm always glad to hear that Andrew Wakefield is uncomfortable. Don't understand why he's not in prison though. He's the Typhoid Mary of the Century.

Forum for Active Critical Thinking & Skepticism
unfacts.freeforums.net

I would like to see him debate Paul Offit myself. I am not sure if the vaccines are the cause of autism or not, but I do not think they are 100% risk free, and I would like to see each other battle it out over vaccine safety.

Andrew Wakefield wants a "live public televised debate." Oh, goody.

More like this

The legacy of Andrew Wakefield continues

How not to report science and medical news, vaccine edition

Jenny McCarthy weighs in about Andrew Wakefield--with predictable results

"Interesting times," thanks to a confluence of anti-vaccine pseudoscience

Turning out the lights and moving on: Goodbye, old ScienceBlogs blog, hello new blog

A quick update on the migration to a new domain

A change is gonna come. Respectful Insolence is moving.

And the box of blinky lights has arrived in Manchester for QEDCon

On the "integration" of quackery into the medical school curriculum

How an embryo is like a meatball sub

Most Extreme Animal Shirts

Some like it hot - receptors for capsaicin and wasabi