15 antivaccine tropes for Christmas

the-anti-vaccine-epidemic

Christmas is over, and we're in that weird time between Christmas and New Years Day, when, usually at least, I have to work but so many people are out and so few patients seem to want to come in that it hardly seems worth the effort. So it is with the blog, too. The week between Christmas and New Years tends to be the lowest traffic period of the year. Although that's been true this year as well, I've noticed more commenting activity than I usually see. So, I figured, what the heck? There are odds and ends worth writing about, although I don't plan on doing an epic posts before next Monday. Who knows? Maybe I'll finally figure out how to do brevity right.

Try not to laugh too hard.

In any case, right before Christmas, a reader sent me a link to yet another brain dead listicle that's longer than most listicles in which an antivaccine maven tries to warn a hypothetical "normal, socially accepted person" about to become an antivaccinationist like him what to look out for. (Why is it that antivaccinationists can't seem to keep their listicles short and punchy, as any good link bait listicle should be? Even I can manage that when I put my mind to it.) It's entitled 15 Things You Should Know Before Becoming An Anti-Vaxxer, and, hoo boy, is it a doozy, so much so that I doubt I'll be able to cover all 15 items in the listicle.

At least Matt, who describes himself as a "conservative millennial whose greatest wish is that people would just stop and think" is honest and declares himself an "anti-vaxer." Of course, the very fact that he is an antivaxer demonstrates that, whatever it is he's been thinking about so much, he's been going about it all wrong. No surprise there. He's also useful in that, as a self-declared conservative, he's a nice counterpoint to the mistaken prevailing idea that antivaccine pseudoscience is primarily the province of the left. As I've described many times before, it's not.

His introduction is a combination of bravado and self-pity that we've seen before. In it he declares himself an outcast, but equally declares that he chose this path because, well, I'll let him him say it in his own words:

For those of you still reading, you read that right. An Anti-Vaxxer.

You've seen things about me. The scum of the earth? Disease ridden outcast? The sickie in town?

You've read things about me. The idiot. The moron. The child abuser. The ignorant one.

You've said things about me. The pseudo science pusher? The health nut? The conspiracy theorist?

Yeah... it sucks. But that's me. And the worst part is, I did it to myself.
I chose to be an Anti-Vaxxer, even though I knew forsaking my pro-medicine stance wouldn't be easy.

I chose to keep researching when I had my curiosity peaked. I chose to keep clicking those links.

I chose to delve into forbidden mainstream knowledge; to suckle at the temptingly attractive teat of common sense. I chose to walk this path.
I guess some people have to learn the hard way. I did.

See? He's a special snowflake, not like all those pro-vaccine sheeple. He kept researching. He kept clicking those antivaccine links on the Internet. Unlike you, he was brave enough to "delve into forbidden knowledge." At this point, I wanted to ask Matt whether he had given himself a rotator cuff tear patting himself on the back so furiously, but I couldn't because of the bile rising in my throat due to a profound urge to vomit in reaction to his self-important arrogance of ignorance. However, I have seen worse; so my constitution is strong enough to resist such urges.

Let's "cherry pick" my favorites among the 15 items. Feel free to take on the leftovers that I don't bother with or to take a bite out of ones I have.

The first item Matt starts out with is this:

1. Once you go down this road, you won't go back.

If you really put in the time and research, you'll eventually see for yourself what the 'crazies' are really saying. You'll also realize that it makes perfect sense. It's logical. And you'll see that what you've been thinking are anti-scientific ramblings all these years are really the most scientifically valid points in the entire debate.

You'll see that there really is more risk than benefit, and that there really haven't been any legitimate safety studies conducted on vaccines or their ingredients.

You'll see plenty of other things along the way, and if you put enough time in, you'll realize sooner or later that there's no going back. It's ok, though. There's a growing number of sensible, down-to-earth people who are there to help you along the way. The road is dark, but there's light at the end. I promise.

To me, this resembles a promise to a convert to a new religion. "Listen," the priest or imam or whatever cleric we're talking about will say, "It's hard. It'll take a lot of work. People will give you crap. But it's worth it. There are lots of people doing the same thing." Whether that's the case with a religion is pretty subjective. Whether it's the case "converting" to the religion of antivaccination is easy to assess: It's not. What Matt is trying to persuade people is that becoming an antiscience loon who endangers his own children and others is a good thing to be.

In fact, consider item #2, which is that "you'll be forced to ponder certain possibilities you didn't consider before." What Matt doesn't tell you is that the reason you didn't consider these possibilities before is because you were a rational, pro-science, pro-medicine person before. It's only by contemplating and embracing (or at least accepting) pseudoscience that you can become an antivaccinationist like him. Oh, well...

Perhaps my favorite is this one:

3. Sometimes conspiracy theories are actually true.

You'll instantly be branded a conspiracy theorist for questioning vaccines. No, I'm not kidding.

Numerous 'extremist' Pro-Vaxxers will descend on you like vultures on a carcass just for asking why the autism rate is skyrocketing, since you'll discover that there's plenty of evidence to suggest that autism is a body disease, not a mental disease, and it's an auto-immune body response. You'll see how many thousands of kids out there suddenly developed autism after a vaccine(often first noticed after a whooping cough shot). You'll see that there's a ton of correlation between vaccines and autism. Doesn't matter, though. You'll be a laughing stock. They'll say that theory has been debunked, and then fail to show you any real studies to back this up. They call you names, and lump you in with other conspiracies that you may even think are ridiculous, just to publicly shame you. Get ready.

But a conspiracy theory is just that: A theory with some sort of compelling evidence that someone is covering up an act of crime and lying about it. Until it's proven, it remains a theory. Let's go on to prove vaccines are at the heart of one of the biggest, evidence based conspiracies out there.

Or, far more likely, you really have become a conspiracy monger. After all, contrary to what Matt claims, there is no correlation between vaccines and autism, at least not any that indicates causation. As I've described more times than I can remember over the last decade, all the well-designed epidemiological studies that have looked at the question have failed to find a correlation. Yes, autism prevalence has increased greatly over the last 20 years, but that does not mean that it's the vaccines. Again, as I've pointed out before, cell phone use has increased greatly over the last 20 years. Why isn't it cell phones? Wifi use has skyrocketed over that same period. Why isn't it wifi? Internet usage in general has also skyrocketed? Why isn't it the Internet that's causing autism. But, no. It's the vaccines. It's always the vaccines. It's always been the vaccines. To antivaccinationists, it will always be the vaccines. Always. You can see that by the way that Matt says, "let's go on to prove vaccines are at the heart of one of the biggest, evidence based conspiracies out there." Not "let's see if vaccines are at the heart of one of the biggest, evidence based conspiracies out there" Rather, let's prove it.

In other words, Matt "knows" vaccines are evil. He's just cherry picking information to "prove it."

Which leads to Matt's warning that you'll become a "hardened person":

You'll become immune to insults after a while. The 'extremist' Pro-Vaccine crowd shows up online in large numbers and hurls many stones. They may hurt at first, but if you keep at it, it just toughens your skin. After a while, you'll probably become so calloused that you may not even care what your friends or family members think of you anymore. There is a time that you reach a point of nay-saying immunity, and it's certainly not thanks to a vaccine.

As my irony meter melted down, I went on to read:

5. You'll need to develop an acute sense of civility.

As a battle hardened veteran of the vaccine debate, you'll be filled with an urge to warn others, yet take the high road in most debates. You'll see that to win a vaccine argument, you need to be poised and controlled. While some sarcasm is allowed, you can't overdo it. Once you've discovered that vaccines are nothing but a big gamble with your child's life, you'll want to make sure those you love have the same information.

And that's when Matt blew another one of my irony meters. He melted that sucker flat, to the point that all that was left was was a bubbling, pathetic, sparking pile of goo. After all, over the last decade I've endured frequent abuse at the hand of antivaccinationists like Matt. Four years ago, antivaccinationists mounted a concerted effort to get me fired from my job. Since then, periodically they mount attacks against me. If Matt really thinks antivaccinationists are (or have to be) more "civil" than their opponents, I respectfully submit that he is on crack.

Reading the rest of Matt's listicle, which is well over 6,000 words and thus actually beyond even what I, who am known for my logorrhea, usually generate, led me to conclude that I must stand in awe. While it's true that I do indeed sometimes write 6,000 word posts, particularly for my not-so-super-secret other blog, but for the most part, I keep myself under 2,000-3,000 words here, which is plenty indeed. That's why I'm not going to march through each and every item, although I must admit that #10 ("you'll read the ingredients on a vaccine insert") amused me given the frequently used and deceptive technique of "argument by package insert" so beloved of antivaccinationists. Add to that his liberal use of the "toxins gambit," and the lulz just keep coming. (If you don't believe me, read Matt's hilariously scientifically ignorant "rebuttal" to Dr. Paul Offit.) Ditto Matt's claim in #11 that vaccines cause sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). They don't. In fact, if anything, they decrease the risk of SIDS. Then in #6, he proclaims antivaccinationists not "anti-science" while demonstrating quite conclusively in the text that he is, in fact, antiscience. It is, however, very cute to see Matt attempt to justify a "vaxed versus unvaxed" study without understanding clue one about why a randomized, placebo-controlled study of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children would be unethical and without a hint that he might understand the incredible difficulties that would be involved in carrying out such a study. It's not so cute when he delves into the intellectually dishonest "vaccines didn't save us" gambit in #7, when he describes vaccines as "one of the biggest hoaxes in human history."

Perhaps what's most telling is #12:

12. You'll start to realize there's a big problem with western medicine.

The more you research, the more you'll start to see that modern medicine has some real issues. Ever notice how when you're sick, you get a prescription for something usually pretty expensive (most insurance covers the majority of cost) that temporarily relieves your symptoms? Most doctors will recommend some kind of medication to mask your issue, not fix it.

The reason is simple: Most doctors don't know how to fix your problem. Instead, they prescribe man-made medicine that will "help" only to a certain degree, instead of focusing on ridding the body of your ailment. Your time is much better spent with a holistic health provider. They will actually take the time to inform you of the best natural way to cleanse your body of various ailments; with amazing results. Many people roll their eyes when you mention holistic health. This is partly due to the work of Big Pharma, who has put in a ton of subtle work behind the scenes to make sure you think that way. There is potentially a lot of money flushed down their drains for every person that seeks natural healthcare.

Everything you see nowadays is designed to make you think that modern medicine is the best thing since sliced bread. They'll also tell you that homeopathic medicine and natural healthcare are "dangerous", and unproven. You'll discover that this is not true at all. Most of the things your holistic health provider recommends fix the problem fast, with no side effects, are cheaper, and have been proven for hundreds or even thousands of years. There are many things you'll learn to be able to actually keep yourself healthy and your immune system like an iron horse so you're less likely to get sick in the first place.

Of course Big Pharma would have a problem with holistic health; it's a direct threat to their business. As we've already discussed, once the pharmaceutical companies are upset, the medical system, government branches, and media are soon to follow. It's a vicious cycle, so it will come as no surprise to you that many holistic health care providers are targets. The government seeks to shut them down whenever possible and strip them of their medical licenses. They are under intense scrutiny from a very powerful entity.

If you actually put in the time to seek holistic diagnoses, you'll learn more in an hour about your body than you ever knew before, and you'll quickly discover it's far from the quackery you thought it was. It really works; I've personally experienced it.

No, the reason I roll my eyes when someone like Matt mentions "holistic health" is because I know that what he means by it is a hodge-podge of quackery. It is, however, amusing to see just how much antivaccine views correlate with quackery. Naturopaths and chiropractors, for instance, are notorious for being antivaccine or at least for giving out advice that, if not blatantly antivaccine, tends to be littered with antivaccine tropes dressed up as "skepticism" and "natural healing." In the above passage, there are the very common tropes trotted out by quacks of all stripes about "Western" (don't get me started on the racism inherent in that term) medicine: The claim that doctors "just treat the symptoms, not the cause" (never mind that homeopathy, for instance, is all about treating only symptoms); that "holistic medicine" is somehow a threat to big pharma that pharma must destroy; that "detoxification" cures everything and you can prevent vaccine-preventable disease with diet (expounded on explicitly and in more detail in his incredibly brain dead "rebuttal" to Paul Offit).

The arrogance of ignorance is strong in this one. Very strong. Worse, he's proud of it and thinks he's "educated" himself.

More like this

My irony meter exploded in a near-nuclear conflagration, leaving nothing but a sputtering, molten puff of plasma when I was referred to this gem from Kim Stagliano over at Age of Autism directed at the enemy of all anti-vaccine pseudoscience, that Dark Lord of Vaccination (to anti-vaccine loons)…
I was measured, science-based, and reasonable in yesterday's post about the new American Cancer Society guidelines for screening mammography (which is obviously why that post garnered so few comments, thus teaching me my lesson yet again0, but regular readers know that I can be quite obnoxious and…
Once again, the yearly autism quackfest known as Autism One is fast approaching. In fact, it will begin in Chicago tomorrow: five days of "autism biomed" quackery and antivaccine pseudoscience. Ever since the Great Schism in the autism antivaccine quackery community, which severed Generation Rescue…
One of the biggest examples of either self-delusion or lying that emanates from the anti-vaccine movement is the oh-so-pious and indignant denials that inevitably follow from its members and leaders whenever someone like me has the temerity to point out that they are, in fact, anti-vaccine. The…

Fine article. But your lead pic will give Mark Crislip a hernia. He's always rightfully on about how acupuncture lacks sterile technique. Where are the gloves on the person with the hypo?

Wow. That "rebuttal" to Dr. Offit was...something else.

By NH Primary Car… (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

“you’ll be forced to ponder certain possibilities you didn’t consider before.”

Could be Fox Mulder talking.

By Michael Finfer, MD (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

His curiosity was "peaked," huh? And yet he still did research on the downslope?

Thanks for taking on the smug, science-free Matt.

At first I thought the blog "dinnerforthought" was another of Robyn Ross's many, many personas (Robyn Charron, Skye Tormenta, Jordan Baker, Probono Eyecandy, Doritos Reid, CitizenGACNN, Bobby Dee, Reece Barnett, Johnston Roslyn, Heather Green) because the tone was so similar the one she used writing as Michael Chad (Stay-At-Home Dad), especially in the attacks on Paul Offit.

But I eventually tracked down who Matt is -- he is a real person, with a business and everything, unlike Robyn "Michael Chad" Ross.

Matt and Robyn are equally, smugly, ignorant.

Brian B, the sterile technique issue with this photo came up previously (but I cannot recall where). I think that image is a stock photo of inoculations in the military. If you look closely at the arm of the vaccinator, you can see that he or or she is dressed in camouflage -- fatigues? What I recall is that gloving to inoculate is not SOP in the military.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

You should have warned us about the orange text on black background which makes Matt's screeds even more difficult to read

By Elmo the Grape (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

Oh, and on perusing Matt's other writings (no I am not linking, the man is a fool but deserves to keep the level of privacy he's made for himself) -- he is an evolution doubter, if not an evolution denier.

Brian B...I already addressed on another thread, the lack of clean (and certainly not sterile) gloves when a doctor or a nurse administers a vaccine. They are not necessary, backed up by OSHA regulations. Washing your hands thoroughly or using an alcohol-based hand washing gel before and between administering vaccines to different patients, is all that is ever required.

The picture shows improper technique by showing fingers very close or touching the sterile needle.

OMG, Matt must confusing the LAIV flu vaccine with the killed virus seasonal influenza vaccine:

"Don't forget that a few popular flu shots still contain thimerosal too. And there are flu shots available that actually carry the live attenuated virus, and have been known to shed the illness it's supposed to prevent. Any guesses why you don't hear about that on TV?"

Gee Matt, you don't hear about that on TV or in the medical literature which you have so intently studied using your Google Fu, because the "flu shot" contains no live virus.

Matt also encountered great difficulty accessing the VAERS data. I wonder why?

"You'll learn quickly throughout your research just how many "rare" severe injuries actually do occur. One of the first things any person should look at is VAERS. The Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System can be found on the CDC's website, although it's not very easy to access for public browsing. Once you jump through a bunch of hoops to get in, you'll see tens of thousands of reports from doctors and parents of adverse effects, including death, following a vaccination. Keep in mind that the estimated number of actual reporting on adverse effects is only between 1 and 10 percent, although it's believed to be as low as just 1 to 2 percent. Just think how many injuries and deaths are not even considered to be related to vaccines! Most doctors won't even acknowledge the possibility that the vaccine cause an adverse effect, and it's even harder to get anyone to admit that SIDS could very easily be explained if you admit the vaccine could have caused it."

How about trying to access the readily available Vaccine Adverse EVENTS Reporting System, Matt?

Imagine that. Matt has only been blogging for two months or less and he's hit the big time by attracting the attention of Orac and his minions.

"Once you jump through a bunch of hoops to get in, you’ll see tens of thousands of reports from doctors and parents of adverse effects, including death, following a vaccination."

Bunch of hoops? You just have to agree that the data are incomplete, that the data are self-reported, and that the data do not represent an epidemiological study into causation. Simple, one-click agreement. That's a bunch of hoops?

It's also funny to me how antivaxxers don't acknowledge that deaths in vehicle accidents while enrolled in a vaccine effectiveness study are reported, or that older, overweight, smokers (and some on birth control on top of all those other risk factors) who then die weeks after a vaccine from a blood clot are reported. Was it the smoking? No. Was it the morbid obesity? No. Was it the birth control? No.

It was the vaccines. Right.

Far from having a "pro-medicine stance" and having his interest in vaccine safety "peaked" [sic] after having children, Matt was raised as an antivaxxer:

I was always told as a kid that vaccines were suspect, and apparently that always stuck with me. I was never vaccinated.

So it isn't true that he was enlightened by his Google research, he has simply searched for information that supports what he was told by his parents, and ignored anything that does not. Isn't that the very definition of being brain-washed and closed-minded as he accuses vaccine proponents of being?

I was bemused by what he wrote about rotavirus:

According to the CDC itself, Rotavirus kills approximately 40 babies in the U.S every year. That is hardly the epidemic you'd have us believe in. Not only that, it's got one of the lowest death rates of any "vaccine preventable" diseases out there. I don't see it as necessary, but of course, you'll tell me I should follow the CDC's recommended schedule.

He somehow omitted to mention that before the rotavirus vaccine was introduced, not only did 20-60 children under five die from the disease (which apparently is acceptable, as long as it isn't his children, I guess), but 55,000 to 70,000 children were hospitalized every year in the US.

Now I know I'm not the only person here who has nursed a child through the spectacular vomiting, diarrhea and diarrhea that rotavirus causes. Personally, seeing my daughter sunken-eyed, dehydrated and miserable was heart-wrenching, almost as bad as when my son was hospitalized with whooping cough.

Does Matt really think that up to 70,000 children and their families dealing with rotavirus serious enough to require hospitalization every year is preferable to a simple vaccine shot that carries risks of serious side effects so tiny we aren't even sure they are real? He does describe getting chicken pox as a child as his "best week ever", so he clearly has a very distorted view of infectious diseases.

He also writes, "I love my kids more than anything else in this world". Why wouldn't he want to protect them from a horrible disease like rotavirus? I don't get it, and I see nothing in what he has written that remotely supports his bizarre belief that "there really is more risk than benefit" from vaccines.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

"5. You’ll need to develop an acute sense of civility."

Sorry, I fell off my chair reading that one and sprained my rotator cuff so severely that I couldn't scroll any further.

"I just spent two weeks in bed with acute Hepatitis."
"Which one, you lucky dog? They're both cute, those Hepatitis girls."

By Dangerous Bacon (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

"Imagine that. Matt has only been blogging for two months or less and he’s hit the big time by attracting the attention of Orac and his minions."

Matt is certainly making a good case for "Dunning-Kruger rookie of the year" in the blogosphere.

By Christopher (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

it’s even harder to get anyone to admit that SIDS could very easily be explained if you admit the vaccine could have caused it.

Making up a cause for SIDS is an easy way to explain it. The problem is it's not a useful way to explain it.

By justthestats (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

Unfortunately, Mikey produces a list for year's end as well:
The most censored health news stories of 2014- here's what the establishment doesn't want you to remember (naturalnews, today).

Fortunately, it has only two items: the CDC whistleblower miasma and the ebola "cover-up".

Then he rags on about how truly awful the media is and how the alternative media is fabulous** with a list of his faves.

** it is, in the original sense of the word.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

" 3. Sometimes conspiracy theories are actually true."

Sounds like what Jake Crosby said to yours truly a few years ago.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

@Krebiozen #11: my nephew spent a week in ICU with rota, at the age of nine months. I completely agree with your point about the benefit/risk ratio. But for the record, the usual response when I mention it in vaccine discussion is the question "was he breastfed" - as if breastfeeding is an absolute bar to this?

And yes, Matt seems to be suffering from a serious rosy view of preventable diseases. Let's hope he doesn't have to learn better. Isn't living in a privileged, first world country where most people vaccinate and protect your children from your choices a wonderful thing?

By Dorit Reiss (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

If you go to Matt's site and click on "about", there's a picture of a bunch of rocks. Nothing else.

Contents of his head, perhaps?

Alright, I'm really tired of there being so much discussion of the stock image I used. I only used any image at all because people tell me they can't "pin" posts to Pinterest without one and they look better on Facebook. So I replaced the image. End of story, I hope.

Imagine that. Matt has only been blogging for two months or less and he’s hit the big time by attracting the attention of Orac and his minions.

Well, he seems to have gotten the two posts on that blog circulating around Facebook and Twitter; so he came to my attention. I agree that he could well win the prize for Dunning-Kruger Rookie of the Year, but it's hard to judge from just two posts. He does, however, seem to share a fondness for logorrhea that rivals Orac's own.

To steal a line Orac used to use more often: Mike, you keep using the word "research", I don't think it means what you think it means.

justthestats@15 -- it's even easier if you blame it on witches.

Oh goodie. In the comments section, he says he has a pending article with "much more evidence and information". The title will be "30 solid reasons to NOT vaccinate". I'm so excited to see what "evidence" he will present here.

By FilipinoMedici… (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

OT--I've been lurking for close to a year now, this is the second attempt at posting (first lost in moderation, I think). So, hi everyone!

On topic: I've always thought the concept of the "vaxed vs. unvaxed" study is only ethical if you consider vaccines to be useless. Not just harmless, but having no effect at all. If you think vaccines are very harmful, you'd have to morally object to the "vaxed" arm of the study. If you think (as any sensible person should) that vaccines are very helpful, you'd have to morally object to the "unvaxed" arm of the study (as the sensible people do).

What surprises me the most is that the most vocal anti-vaxxers are totally OK with poisoning children on purpose just to prove their point.

By Shadowflash (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

Huh. I still see the pic with the hypo. You must have changed it before I submit this and refresh the page. I'd better save it; it's a great pic.

I love the anti vax argument: "Vaccines are bad because Big Pharma is evil! So let's replace modern medicines with something not even proven to work!"

I swear, I have whiplash from shaking my head over the logic fail.

@shay:
Good point. Are there any witched vs. unwitched studies in PudMed? QED.

By justthestats (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

I only used any image at all because people tell me they can’t “pin” posts to Pinterest without one....

This seems to represent a fundamental misunderstanding of what Pinterest is nominally for.

It's much better to get vaccinated for vaccine preventable diseases and become autistic, if there is indeed a correlation, than die. After all, there is nothing wrong with autism, and some people actually consider autism a way of life.

Good for you, taking on this guys whacko list. I just wanted to blow up his blog with explosives.

By thewildeman2 (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

"Civility" doesn't mean honesty, and iit doesn't mean not attacking or silencing people. It means using the "right" words when lying; it may mean acting calm while telling people to shut up about the "civil" person having hurt them.

There is no ethical difference between repeatedly saying "I'm afraid that won't be possible" and eventually shouting "the answer is no! Shut the f*** up and leave me alone!" One is a more civil attempt at the same goal than the other, and either may or may not work. There is nothing wrong with being civil, either, but polite phrasing doesn't make lies true.

Pedantic I know, but this bit got to me:

I chose to keep researching when I had my curiosity peaked [sic]

I wonder if Matt might be a Scientologist? That level of robotic smug is hard to acquire anywhere else. I say that as someone who works in advertising and branding (but I only use my powers for good).

By Pareidolius (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

Dingo, maybe his curiosity peeked and he never got over what he saw.

By Pareidolius (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

Too much pique-a-boux as a child?

By Pareidolius (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

I really love the cartoon, tha has replaced the original opening image.

I saw a novel antivax argument in a book by a British GP (not practicing per his own report) Vernon Coleman. In the book he says he renewed everything to legally be able to practice with the Medical Register, and that if any of what he said was untrue or really dangerous he would obviously be stuck off, therefore if he was still a member in good standing one could trust that all of his antivax information was correct.

I"ve sensed a new disturbance in the anti-vax "Force" (blogosphere) - Aluminum is the new Mercury! I hope Orac revisits this trope soon.

Happy belated Festivus orac! Hope the airing of grievances and feats of strength went well this year. Funny joke about brevity.

DISCLAIMER: This little diatribe will rely on personal experience in healthcare (EMS. I'm a paramedic who does critical care). I think it is fair in context but just wanted to point out I realize it.

"often first noticed after a whooping cough shot"
Is DPT the problem now? I thought it was MMR. I feel this more personally than the MMR attacks. I've luckily never taken care of a kid with measles, mumps, or rubella (but some of my buddies have. Some communities around here have terrible vaccination rates). These are just hypotheticals for me; but I have taken care of a few pertussis kids. That is a nasty disease. Some calls we get are not (very) sick kids but pertussis in my experience has always been nasty. Like infants and toddlers taking bipap with 0 resistance because they are just so tired. It's definitely not harmless like antivaxxers would have you believe. Granted I probably only see the worst cases but still isn't one preventable hospitalization (I've had one 6 m.o. end up intubated on a vent; only for 2 days luckily, IIRC) or, god forbid, death (luckily haven't had this) too many? I wonder if a good case of pertussis in one unvaccinated kid would be enough to get the parents to vaccinate the others.

On a similar note, I wonder what antivaxxers would say if there were an RSV vaccine. It's the perennial bogeyman for parents. When I was explaining to my mom why we are so busy fall and winter I said "there's this thing called RSV" and she's like "I know that. You guy [my siblings and I] never got it but it was the kind of thing that kept me up at night." RSV keeps us in business so I would like to become a pharma shill just in case.

Unrelated
It would be awesome if you (maybe in collaboration with your NSSOB) could put together talking points for healthcare providers dealing with antivax parents (the on the fence kind). I think EMS could do a lot of good this way since even anti SBM parents call 911 when their kid gets very sick. Paramedics and firefighters (one in the same around here generally) both have a lot of trust from the public but I've watched guys talk to parents of unvaccinated parents and just drive them further away from SBM. It would be nice to have some good talking points and prepared answers to common arguments for those teaching moments. My state unfortunately won't let us vaccinate (although I've heard rumors of some marvericks down south doing vaccinations at the fire houses) but I think it would be cool to see a study of how allowing paramedics to adminster vaccines affects rates (especially in communities where it's falling).
tl;dr I think EMS is a underutilized vehicle for advocating vaccines and would love some help/ideas on exploring this.

We're (EMS) kind of the lowest rung right now (as the newbies are wont to be) and a little slow on the uptake of evidence based medicine (especially in the sovereign state of Chicago). Still, our position (not so much mine doing only hospital-hospital but you get the point) in the community is pretty unique among healthcare providers.

By brofessor (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

@kilnon: Well, since no one becomes autistic from vaccines, yes getting vaccinated is much better than dying ;)

Many Aspies don't consider themselves "abnormal." Just different in their own way.

However, the autistics who are profoundly mentally retarded and can't abide any kind of stimulation, well we really don't know how happy they actually are or if they even understand what happy means. Their parents know that caring for these children is very difficult and getting resources is equally difficult.

I can't blame the parents for wanting answers and wanting hope. I feel sorry for them.

Having said that, though, I don't excuse spreading misinformation, as if it were some sort of way of taking revenge on the world for their suffering.

Here's a precious bit from Matty's blog:

One last thing you'll develop on your journey to become an Anti-Vaxxer is an endless desire to share information with others. Once you're a veteran of the vaccine trenches, it grows old to continue providing sources to hundreds of interested people who want to learn. It's not that we aren't encouraged by your endeavors, it's just that we've told this story a thousand times before. That's why I don't give many references or links in my blogs. I encourage readers to take matters into their own hands and put in the elbow grease themselves.

So, you can't tell if Matty is lying or misrepresenting stuff...because he won't tell you where he read it.

Oh, and on perusing Matt’s other writings (no I am not linking, the man is a fool but deserves to keep the level of privacy he’s made for himself) — he is an evolution doubter, if not an evolution denier.

You're cutting him more slack than I would. The Ebola remark was just precious, BTW.

Liz Ditz quoting Matt: "Once you’re a veteran of the vaccine trenches, it grows old to continue providing sources to hundreds of interested people who want to learn."

Funny, I don't remember when an anitivaxer gave out any useful verifiable sources. Usually they just spout the same old websites and discredited papers by Wakefield, Shaw, Singh, Geier, etc. Or they just say, like he is in that sentence: "Google it yourself."

I'm a "veteran of the vaccine trenches," having been at it far longer than Matt, and I never tire of providing links to my sources on this blog. I do it frequently and copiously. I will admit that I didn't throw in as many links to my sources as I usually do in my rebuttal to Matt, but that's just because there were so many antivaccine tropes in his post that I've deconstructed so many times before that I didn't have time to look up all my old posts and primary sources for all of them.

Be that as it may, it's come to my attention that Matt has been reading the comments here. Clearly he has a problem with little things called links, because many of my assertions had links to back them up, mostly to posts I've written in the past in which I refute various bits of antivaccine misinformation, almost always with links leading to the sources. Obviously, Matt hasn't clicked on any of them. Of course, maybe he doesn't understand the concept, given that he has yet to provide links to his sources.

But, hey, maybe Matt'll keep reading as my minions continue to deconstruct the copious quantities of nonsense in his two posts that I linked to. Who knows? Maybe he'll learn something, although, sadly, I doubt it.

Reading his uh *cough* rebuttal to Dr Offit, this comment immediately stands out:

"I was never vaccinated. I'm pretty sure that's true, because I had a terrible case of Chicken Pox when I was 11."

Um, looking at his profile pic, he looks to be about my age which means he probably got chicken pox BEFORE the vaccine came out. And just because he didn't get that vaccine, doesn't necessarily mean he didn't get the others.

Aaaaaaaaaaand I can't read any more. It's just making me angry. It's all the usual anti-vax propaganda, this time with no references to the biased sources he's getting it from, and a holier than thou attitude, not to mention the fact that he specifically says he's got a degree from Google U and is proud of it.

The derp is strong in that one.

Indeed it is. Very strong indeed. Worse (but, to an extent, amusing to me), there's not the least hint of self-awareness in Matt. He's a University of Google student and proud of it, to the point that he thinks he can take on someone like Paul Offit who's...oh, you know...a real vaccine expert who's actually developed a vaccine and has studied vaccines all his professional life. Arrogance of ignorance, indeed.

Tbruce:

If you go to Matt’s site and click on “about”, there’s a picture of a bunch of rocks. Nothing else.

Contents of his head, perhaps?

He has obviously read this page and that comment. I saw the picture of rocks on the "about" page earlier, but now it is gone.

So Matt when you say: "Most Pro-Vaxxers will tell you that we have vaccines to thank for the disappearance of small pox, polio, measles, pertussis, etc. "

Oh, do tell me why the incidence of measles plummeted 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970. Though do be careful to not confuse "morbidity" (aka incidence rate) with "mortality" (death), and to not mention any other decade nor any other country. See the following data from the US Census, not CDC:
From http://www.census.gov/prod/99pubs/99statab/sec31.pdf
Year.... Rate per 100000 of measles
1912 . . . 310.0
1920 . . . 480.5
1925 . . . 194.3
1930 . . . 340.8
1935 . . . 584.6
1940 . . . 220.7
1945 . . . 110.2
1950 . . . 210.1
1955 . . . 337.9
1960 . . . 245.4
1965 . . . 135.1
1970 . . . . 23.2
1975 . . . . 11.3
1980 . . . . . 5.9
1985 . . . . . 1.2
1990 . . . . .11.2
1991 . . . . . .3.8
1992 . . . . . .0.9
1993 . . . . . .0.1
1994 . . . . . .0.4
1995 . . . . . .0.1
1996 . . . . . .0.2
1997 . . . . . . 0.1

And then Matt continues with: "Measles have been making a rebound recently, according to the CDC. Part of the reason is that the live virus MMR(measles, mumps, & rubella) vaccine can actually shed the disease to others on contact after vaccination."

Oh, really? Then why are the index cases most often those who had not been give the MMR vaccine? It seems that un-vaxed go overseas to where there are outbreaks and then spread measles at home:

Of the 288 cases, 280 (97%) were associated with importations from at least 18 countries. The source of measles acquisition could not be identified for eight (3%) cases. Forty-five direct importations (40 U.S. residents returning from abroad and five foreign visitors) have been reported. Almost half (22 [49%]) of these importations were travelers returning from the Philippines, where a large outbreak has been occurring since October 2013. Imported cases were also associated with travel from other countries in the World Health Organization (WHO) Western Pacific Region (seven cases), as well as countries in the WHO South-East Asia (eight), European (four), Americas (three), and Eastern Mediterranean (one) regions. Measles genotype information was obtained from 103 (36%) of the 288 measles cases. Four measles virus genotypes were identified: B3 (67 cases), D9 (23), D8 (12), and H1 (one) (Table).

Of course you'll just chalk it up to Conspiracy! Because obviously asking you to provide a PubMed indexed study by reputable qualified researchers to back up your Google U. claims would be just of the "pro-science conspiracy!"

And then Matt continues with: “Measles have been making a rebound recently, according to the CDC. Part of the reason is that the live virus MMR(measles, mumps, & rubella) vaccine can actually shed the disease to others on contact after vaccination.”

That's got Graph Boy Miller written all over it.

Hence the warning for him to not confuse "mortality" and "morbidity."

Though I did love it when Miller's counterpart Stone kept insisting on using data from England and Wales. I asked him why as a UK citizen he thought they were American states.

there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that autism is a body disease, not a mental disease, and it’s an auto-immune body response.

It's always this with these people, isn't it? "Autism is a body disease, not a mental disease. Don't you dare lump autistic children in with mentally ill people." I mean, yeah, it's a body disease in that it has to do with the brain. The brain is part of the body, after all. Never mind that most "mental" diseases probably have a little something to do with the brain as well.

I mean, I kind of get it. I think it was Sylvia Plath in The Bell Jar, probably in the part where she was on the psych ward, that she'd rather have almost anything wrong with her body that something wrong with her mind. I don't think I know somebody who's had to deal with mentall illness, and everything that comes with it, who hasn't thought the same thing. Wishing, though, doesn't make it so.

There are many things you’ll learn to be able to actually keep yourself healthy and your immune system like an iron horse so you’re less likely to get sick in the first place.

An iron horse? That's a train, son. I think you were going for some variation on "healthy as a horse" here.

Oy, vey. I just went back to read the comments in Matt's two posts. His response to questions about why he didn't link to his primary sources are truly full of lulz. For instance (spaces added to make it more legible, as Matt seems to have a problem with formatting things to make them tolerable to read, as well):

My reasons for not posting links were explained in the blog, as well as here.

Actually, I believe the burden of proof lies with the drug companies, the CDC, and FDA. They claim they've studied vaccines to the point that they can say with certainty they are safe for all. However, when repeatedly asked, they fail to provide the studies we ask for. Until they can show us the studies, the burden of proof lies with them.

As for peer reviewed literature, there is plenty of it to support vaccines. However, I don't always trust it. For example:

http://www.fhfn.org/exposed-90-of-peer-reviewed-vaccine-safety-studies-…

There's some compelling things in that link.

As I stated before, it's up to you to do your own research on the topic. I will make no claim to offer medical advice, so I will not share the research I've done over the past few years, because it would take months for you to pour over. I did however give you a good place to start if you're really serious about learning the risks of vaccines.

Except for one link to a hilariously bad article (an article so bad that it might be Orac-bait for a future post) in an antivaccine source, Matt's response is basically a long-winded equivalent of "Google it yourself." Actually, he makes it explicit in saying, "Do your own research."

His intellectual laziness and arrogance of ignorance are so epic that even some antivaxers seem to have a problem with his failure to provide sources to back up his claims.

Oops, I missed a spot:

It's a vicious cycle, so it will come as no surprise to you that many holistic health care providers are targets. The government seeks to shut them down whenever possible and strip them of their medical licenses. They are under intense scrutiny from a very powerful entity.

A very powerful entity? What is this entity? Who is it? Could it be... Satan?

I have a comment in moderation for brofessor -- too many links.

In the meantime, here's another gem from Matt:

Actually, this is an open forum, so I have all comments set to be approved, although if they get out of hand I will delete. However, I've chosen to leave yours up, to demonstrate my point of how many pro-vaxxers attack with no proof or evidence of their argument.

Matt has an odd idea of what constitutes "an attack". And what constitutes an "open forum".

"The government seeks to shut them down whenever possible and strip them of their medical licenses."

The "govmint" licenses quacks?

Yeah, okay, I guess it does. We all know about the Geiers. But their licenses don't get revoked willy-nilly.

Orac: Is the rotator-cuff gag an 'old' doctor's joke, or did you just make it up? Brilliant either way as it's a perfect diagnosis of the "conservative millennial" mind.

The self-important arrogance (and let's not forget the 'I'M the victim!' butt hurt) must be what keeps guys like Matt from the full-on paralysis you'd think would follow the cognitive dissonance inherent in their beliefs. I'm not sure a conspiracy theory is an absolute necessity for anti-vax 'thinking', but it's hard to go far down that rabbit hole w/o positing some kind of CDC/Big Pharma perfidy. As a conservative, Matt should have no problems smacking Big Guvment. But the pharmas? Free enterprise! Profit is good! The self-regulating invisible hand!

Matt tries to spin it back to Rand-land: the GOVERNMENT is trying to squash the Galts-of-holistic-health by evil REGULATION. But then he has to concede the Feds are just stooges for the pharmas. So, um, Matt, how do you smack down the power of Big Pharma without regulating it? Writing blogs, I guess.

Moon-hoax debunker s.g. collins says the function of conspiracy theories is to draw focus away from actual 'conspiracies' we should be worried about, but can't seem to handle (e.g. moon-hoax vs. Patriot Act). Big Pharma IS a conspiracy. It just isn't the conspiracy the loons think it is. I'm imagining Matt getting to sit-in on executive meetings at Pfizer or Lily, and being totally hear-no-evil, see-no-evil through the whole proceedings. "The business of America is business."

But my comment is mainly about #12. Wow. Number twelve. Mouth-hanging-open...

Wow. Just wow...
That has to make some kind of Hall of Fame. You get the 'Western medicine only treats symptoms and doesn't seek cures <-- profit motive' line, but Matt drives the bus to an outer borough of Stupidville I was unaware existed. Your typical CAMer will drop 'sbm doesn't cure' without elaboration, and let implication do the work. The most effective propaganda always contains a core of truth — cherry-picked, framed, with whipped BS and an artificial cherry on top — and it's the true part that makes it fly with the audience. And it's true enough that 'Western medicine' practice spends most of its time dealing with symptoms, if only because issues that can be fixed/cured get taken off the exam room table. Of course, it's hardly "only", and altie 'modalities' are as much or more directed at symptoms in practice. If we actually looked at alt-'healers' we'd see the political economy claimed for sbm is even more central: the income depends on patients continuing to come back for treatment. So... Don't Look At That! Just look at the sbm! I.e. the propaganda line that works for CAM is 'they can't fix anything!' hoisted to imply, without stating so,'MAYBE we can, so leave us alone to do our thing.' It only works framed in the now. Look harder and deeper, and you get to the question, 'What has anyone ever fixed?' Which is a pretty obvious 'Scoreboard!' for bad ol' Western sbm. Which is why the alties have to be very careful about the 'millennia of success' stuff in presenting this take. It goes to the background, and has to be framed as not-science, but rather the kind of intuitive experiential practice, like plant medicines in the pre-contact jungles of the Amazon, that could indeed be proved effective, if only those stubborn sbm-ers would open their minds and think outside the Big Pharma pill box.

But our dear Matt can't leave well enough alone.

things your holistic health provider recommends FIX THE PROBLEM fast, with no side effects, are cheaper, and have been proven for hundreds or even thousands of years. [my emphasis]

Now that's a bold statement! Too bold for CAM's own good. What could possibly lead Matt to such face-palming hubris? The answer, of course, is right wing ideology.

The biggest face-palm of #12 is yet to come. Over 4,800 words into a post claiming to present the forbidden knowledge revealed and verified by rigorous research, Matt's argument that 'holistic med works' comes down to this:

If you actually put in the time to seek holistic diagnoses, you’ll learn more in an hour about your body than you ever knew before... It really works; I’ve personally experienced it.

YOU are not a special snowflake. YOU do not have Initiative like Matt. YOU are in the dark because you have not sought the light of Truth. MATT has. HE knows It Really Works, because HE has experienced it HIMSELF!

Matt does not identify the rubric of his holistic diagnostician (the prescription seems to be homeopathy, cleansing, and natural-diet-prevents-disease so I'd guess we're talking Naturopath), but then that would distract from the point: holistic med is only valid because MATT has verified it.

I'll say this about Matt. He's quite the contortionist. He can not only twist both shoulders to give himself constant double pats on the back, but kick you in the ass at the same time if you're not patting his back along with him.

I'm reminded of "I’M not going to vaccinate and you can’t make ME.” Speaking of Modern Alt Mama, Orac didn't note the parts of Matt's post that frame the discourse within an identity of self-righteous parenthood. Matt signs his post "A Father", has a photo of his infant child next to his as his "Author" pic. What ended his "normal" life and propelled him to existence as a reviled social-outcast anti-vaxer? Fatherhood.

Few and far between, it seems, are the anti-vaxers who can resist the opportunity to hammer the reader with 'I am special and important because I have a child!' Of course, this isn't just an anti-vax thing (Dear self-righteous parent: the over-sized "Baby On Board" sign giving you an extra blind spot makes me want to hit your car, not avoid it), but Matt wheels it into the familiar territory of anti-vax martyrdom. He has taken The Hard Road. Because he is better than you are. And, oh, how he suffers for his Excellence!

Pride in arrogant ignorance: √.
Privilege as victimhood: √
Paranoid delusions: √
F-You selfishness: √
Warped 'family values': √
Boundless self-aggrandizement: √
Smug superiority: √

Did you notice that under the imperative for everyone to "just stop and think" (like him), Matt also urges us to "connect the dots?" OK, I'm connecting the dots of my checklist, and... Yes! a picture is forming... Is it Glenn Beck? No... It's a cartoon of Ted Cruz and Rand Paul!

[Not that righties don't do the D-K, but there's way more going on with Matt than Dunning-Kruger, so I'd vote 'No' on Dunning-Kruger Rookie of the Year as other awards would make a much better and more specific fit. 'Freedom' Narcisso-Martyrdom Rookie of the Year???]
.......
By my arrival, the cartoon had replaced the injection photo at the top of the OP, so when I got to the first comment I was confused about the reference to Mark Crislip and acupuncture. So I started thinking: why AREN'T needles into the brain part of acupuncture? If acupuncture followed the cartoon, facts wouldn't need to be injected, just the needle would do, and unlike the sbm doc, TCM would know where to stick the needle. What if acupuncture could stop anti-vaxism? What would Dr. Crislip say then? I think the prospects for that treatment are actually quite promising! You just need to find the right spot, and push the needle a lot farther in. : -)
[just kidding...]
........
word counts
Matt: 6,571
Orac: 2,631
sadmar: 1,246

What do I win? ; -)

an article so bad that it might be Orac-bait for a future post

It's the most impressive petard-based aerial feat I've seen in some time.

Thanks, Orac, I appreciate this post. After a discussion about vaccines over the holidays (pro-vax, but with some dubious assertions), I decided to catch up on the vaccination scene. It is sad, though, to see that so little has changed since I drifted off to other skeptical topics. Thanks for including the links!

By Walt Jones (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

"[W]e discover that small pox was actually eradicated thanks to more sanitary living conditions, cleaner water, and better food. Not the vaccine, if you study the dates. "

Yeah. Sanitation, cleaner water, and better food are great for preventing the spread of airborne diseases. I am in awe of his research skills.

Our good host mentioned Matt's point #6 You're not really "Anti-Science" in passing. That passage contained the following passage:

The CDC admits that most of the studies that "proved" safety were performed by a current FBI fugitive. Not kidding. He's on the run for stealing money from the testing grants for his own personal use. Similar to what Dr. Wakefield was condemned for; yet the CDC continues to use the study results as biblical truth.

That whole thing is almost a word salad, but let's break it down (Part I -- the FBI futitive single-handedly has performed all vaccine safety research to date.)

Who is this "current FBI fugitive
Poul Thorsen. It does appear that, between 2004 and 2010, he did commit embezzlement, and yes, he is still on the Office of the Inspector General's most wanted list; he is in Denmark, awaiting extradition.

Has the CDC admitted that Thorsen performed most of the vaccine safety studies?
No. That is apparently a figment of Matt's imagination.

Did Thorsen work on vaccine safety studies?
Yes. He is listed as an author on the following vaccine-safety studies. (Note: Thorsen P is listed as a co-author on 128 studies, few having to do with vaccination. I am not sure how common a surname "Thorsen" is in Denmark, or how common "Thorsen P" is. There could be several Thorsen P researchers, just as there are Smith P or Jones P in English-language research venues.)

For those not familiar with what the order of authors' names signify in scientific studies: overall, authors in the middle of the list of names means that said person contributed to the research, but was not responsible for the study design or the execution of the study.

Vaccine Safety Studies (autism and otherwise) in which Thorsen was a contributing author:

2002
N Engl J Med. 2002 Nov 7;347(19):1477-82.
A population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism.
Madsen KM, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, Olsen J, Melbye M.

Ugeskr Laeger. 2002 Dec 2;164(49):5741-4.
[MMR vaccination and autism--a population-based follow-up study].
[Article in Danish]
Madsen KM, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, Olsen J, Melbye M.

2003:
Pediatrics. 2003 Sep;112(3 Pt 1):604-6.
Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism: negative ecological evidence from Danish population-based data.
Madsen KM, Lauritsen MB, Pedersen CB, Thorsen P, Plesner AM, Andersen PH, Mortensen PB.

2004
JAMA. 2004 Jul 21;292(3):351-7.
MMR vaccination and febrile seizures: evaluation of susceptible subgroups and long-term prognosis.
Vestergaard M, Hviid A, Madsen KM, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, Schendel D, Melbye M, Olsen J.

Autism Risk Studies, Other Than Vaccines, in which Thorsen was a contributing author:
2007
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007 Feb;161(2):193-8.
Time trends in reported diagnoses of childhood neuropsychiatric disorders: a Danish cohort study.
Atladóttir HO, Parner ET, Schendel D, Dalsgaard S, Thomsen PH, Thorsen P.

2008
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2008 Dec;162(12):1150-6. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.162.12.1150.
Autism prevalence trends over time in Denmark: changes in prevalence and age at diagnosis.
Parner ET, Schendel DE, Thorsen P.

Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2008 Nov;22(6):562-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2008.00973.x.
Neonatal jaundice: a risk factor for infantile autism?
Maimburg RD, Vaeth M, Schendel DE, Bech BH, Olsen J, Thorsen P.

Has Thorsen ever been a lead author/principal investigator on vaccine safety studies?
No.

What Other Vaccine Safety Studies (autism and otherwise) have been published, in which Thorsen was NOT contributing author?
Querying PubMed for (Vaccine safety) NOT Thorsen P[Author] 13180
Querying PubMed for (Vaccine Safety Studies) NOT Thorsen P[Author] yields 3899 results

What Other Autism Risk Studies, Other Than Vaccines, have been published, in which Thorsen was NOT a contributing author?
Querying PubMed for (autism risk factors) NOT Thorsen[Author] yields 1,668 results.

So, what can we say about Matt's claim:

The CDC admits that most of the studies that "proved" safety were performed by a current FBI fugitive.

Uhm. The most charitable interpretation is that Matt does not understand how scientific research works, does not understand the vaccine safety literature, and has been mislead by only reading anti-vaccine sites, which are similarly, well, ignorant.

I got msg'd today by an aquaintence who is very anti-vax among a lot of conspiratorial positions he takes... nice guy otherwise.
http://themindunleashed.org/2014/10/mit-researchers-new-warning-todays-…

so I said "So it's not vaccines that cause autism any longer, it's Monsanto?" He of course came back with a vapid response which I didn't come back at that poisons are known to be causing it.
I said that this woman has no credentials to be fear mongering like this. So now it's Roundup that's going to cause 50% of kids to be autistic by 2025..... hilarious. What great friends I have, no really.... sigh

Thanks for the links LIz. Only scanned them but looks like a solid starting point. I'll try sharing with my some of my friends and coworkers for now; there's a couple guys/girls I can think of who I think would be very receptive*.

I have big dreams but lack the authority and experience to put them into action. I think a starting an accredited CE class on educating parents about vaccines could do a lot of good (did a *brief* search and couldn't find anything of the sort). I've heard of CE for car seat education (I've been led to believe that education from paramedics and firefighters on proper car seat use has been very effective; never seen actually data though). Once the idea solidifies a little more I think I'll bring it up to my supervisor (probably not exactly who I need but she certainly knows more than I do) and go from there.

One thing I think is really cool about this idea is maybe using NEMSIS** to evaluate vaccine education strategies. Systems (states even) that implement some kind of CE could add a couple custom NEMSIS elements (I think this would need to wait for NEMSIS 3 to be rolled out) relating to talking to parents of pediatric patients about vaccines and coordinate with pediatricians to track vaccine uptake of those kids. This could be a HUGE source of data for evaluating the efficacy of various educational strategies. This stuff is way over my head though.

Anyways, thanks again for the information LIz. It would be great if anything came of my ideas; I'll keep you posted (expect updates to be slow and infrequent though). If anyone with more pull than I have (i.e. most people) wants to take some these ideas and run with it go ahead. No need to credit me as the source or anything ("Inspired by brofessor" doesn't exactly inspire confidence), if it helps prevent some childhood diseases that's good enough for me (I would appreciate a heads up though; would be cool to follow).

TL;DR
-Thanks LIz
-I think CE classes for EMS provides about educating parents on vaccines are a good idea.
-(More) research about effective education strategies seems like a good idea. Could NEMSIS** help?
-Low expectations for my personal efforts. Would love to see the idea picked up by someone higher on the food chain.

*Before, I mentioned some of my buddies work in communities with low vaccination rates; one in particular has very, very strong feelings about anti-vax parents. I'll have to ask him if he reads orac. He can be pretty insolent at times (in private that is; not to parents, I'm told).
**Don't know what NEMSIS is? Neither did I until medic school; I worked as an EMT-B for a little over 2 years before that. From the NEMSIS site:
[QUOTE]
What is NEMSIS?
NEMSIS is a national effort to standardize the data collected by EMS agencies.
NEMSIS stands for the National Emergency Medical Services Information System. NEMSIS is the national repository that will be used to potentially store EMS data from every state in the nation. Since the 1970s, the need for EMS information systems and databases has been well established, and many statewide data systems have been created. However, these EMS systems vary in their ability to collect patient and systems data and allow analysis at a local, state, and national level.

For this reason, the NEMSIS project was developed to help states collect more standardized elements and eventually submit the data to a national EMS database.[/QUOTE]
NEMSIS is great. Chicago changes glacially but the region I went to school in does great work using the data for CQI for specific agencies and providers and updating SOPs based on patient outcomes (some of their systems have been doing spinal clearance since 2010; that's pretty cutting edge, esp. in bassackwards Illinois).

By brofessor (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

Regarding some earlier posts, when I have a spike in a graph, and I want to find the maximum value, I do so in a fit of pique.

By palindrom (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

brofessor, you are reminding me of about three years ago when folks like you were making repeated visits to our house. I was starting to recognize some of the emergency response teams. Le sigh. At least more than one comforted me when we got to the hospital.

This is why folks like Matt make me angry. I have one child who has been saddled with a bad roll of the genetic dice. He had seizures as a baby/toddler (once because of an actual disease, one for which the vaccine came out years later), a severe genetic heart disorder and migraines.

Usually the calls were for his heart (he decided to not take his meds), but the last more memorable was when he had a complex migraine that mimicked a stroke. This was major due to the known heart condition. It also paved the way for his surgery at the Mayo Clinic.

Because of this one child I have been on several ambulance rides, have become familiar with several hospitals and know lots about health insurance. People like Matt who have typical kids and pontificate about the medical system that they never get to know make me very very angry.

And unfortunately their idiotic Google U. rantings will increase the chance that they and others will get to also ride in an ambulance as their child gets transported. I really want to see how much they claim "Big Pharma" makes when they get the $700 plus bill for a two mile ambulance trip (which was fortunately covered by insurance).

So thanks for all you do. At least after his surgery we no longer need to dial 911, plus he much better about taking his heart meds.

(I was looking forward to an afternoon and evening of fun out with some people, but as it turns out, some people, are ill. Did some people get their flu shots? No, some people thought they were immune to flu, and so now they are bedridden and wishing they had made better choices. (Some people may or may not be my children.))

So. Let's spend some time looking at another claim from the article by Matt the Millennial at DinnerforThought, "15 Things You Should Know Before Becoming An Anti-Vaxxer"

Matt's Point 6, Part 2

To refresh your memory: Matt made the following claims.

The CDC admits that most of the studies that "proved" safety were performed by a current FBI fugitive. Not kidding. He's on the run for stealing money from the testing grants for his own personal use. Similar to what Dr. Wakefield was condemned for; yet the CDC continues to use the study results as biblical truth.

In my previous comment, I addressed the "FBI fugitive" part, having to do with the claim that Poul Thorsen was responsible for "most of the studies that "proved" safety."

So. Matt is equating Thorsen and Wakefield. Are there any parallels? Let us see.

Poul Thorsen: what has he accused of?
According to the Office of the Inspector General,

Thorsen allegedly diverted over $1 million of the CDC grant money to his own personal bank account. Thorsen submitted fraudulent invoices on CDC letterhead to medical facilities assisting in the research for reimbursement of work allegedly covered by the grants. The invoices were addressed to Aarhaus University and Sahlgrenska University Hospital. The fact that the invoices were on CDC letterhead made it appear that CDC was requesting the money from Aarhaus University and Sahlgrenska University Hospital although the bank account listed on the invoices belonged to Thorsen.

In April 2011, Thorsen was indicted on 22 counts of Wire Fraud and Money Laundering.
According to bank account records, Thorsen purchased a home in Atlanta, a Harley Davidson motorcycle, an Audi automobile, and a Honda SUV with funds that he received from the CDC grant.

So Thorsen is accused of financial malfeasance.

Has Thorsen stood trial for these alleged crimes and misdemeanors?
No.
Has Thorsen, although he is a medical doctor, ever been accused of medical misconduct?
To the best of my knowledge, no. (Caveat: I do not read Danish; it is possible he has been accused of such. However, I would be surprised if such accusations were not available in English.)

Andrew Wakefield: what has he been accused of?
Some of the charges found proven by the British General Medical Council (thanks to law professor Dorit Reiss for the summary)

Financial malfeasance
Requesting funding from the Legal Aid Board for things that were already covered by NHS (and therefore no funding was needed), used part of that money for other than the purpose it was granted.
Other ethical lapses
Not disclosing to the ethics committee participation in litigation, which was, in fact, a conflict of interest.
Conducting clinical investigations for research purposes (rather than for clinical purposes) with no ethics committee approval.
Involvement in filing a patent related to a measles vaccine and treatment of inflammatory bowel disease.
Medical Misconduct
Subjecting several of the children (in the study that was withdrawn) to investigations contrary to their clinical interests
Giving a child transfer factor – part of the patent – without informing the child’s doctor, for experimental reasons, against the clinical interests of the childTaking blood from children at a birthday party without ethics committee approval, in an inappropriate social setting, with callous disregard to pain and distress of children involved.

Matt seems to think that Thorsen's wrongdoing is exactly parallel to Wakefield's. Matt seems to think that the few studies in which Thorsen was a junior author should be discounted just as the retracted Wakefield paper is (not to mention Wakefield's other autism papers).

Evidently, I cannot comment at Matt's blog post.

Orac has mentioned that Matt may have read some or all of these comments.

If you are reading these comments, Matt, I would like to know your reasoning in equating Thorsen to Wakefield.

brofessor:
Talking points for dealing with fence-sitters:
This. It has pictures. You need pictures.
Vaccine Preventable Disease – The Forgotten Story

Asking here's a good foot forward, IMHO, but you're sticking
the trailing foot in a bear trap with "antivax parents (the on the fence kind)." It's a long way from 'anti-vax' to 'vax-we're-not-sure' — completely different frames of mind. Talking to real anti-vaxers is a waste of time. Talking to fence-sitters may be as important as a defibrillator or the Jaws of Life.

To get fence-sitters down, you need to understand the fence, from the perspective of butt on the rail.

I recently posted some of my own thoughts on fence-sitter persuasionhere. Caveat: I don't do brevity either, and YMMV.

"I’ve watched guys talk to parents of unvaccinated parents and just drive them further away from sbm."
Can you elaborate? What did your guys say, or how did they say it, and why do you think it was counter-productive? Science can't investigate that, so your personal experience is immensely valuable evidence.

Granted, this is actually a little song for the echo chamber he inhabits. In a way, I have to wonder if it is almost a short hand of sorts - they "know" the answers, so just in hinting at them, others in the tribe automatically nod heads (kind of like when end of days preachers say "Babylon"). If you aren't a regular inhabitant of the echo chamber, you are left to either ask for more of their special secret knowledge or traverse the far expanses of Google to locate it yourself. Both of his posts are more for him to get applause and encouragement from others in the echo chamber for his brave pokes at the dragon, not really written with the outer world in mind.

He is either too ignorant to engage rational people or too lazy to try.

Liz Ditz: "If you are reading these comments, Matt, I would like to know your reasoning in equating Thorsen to Wakefield."

Mrs Woo: "He is either too ignorant to engage rational people or too lazy to try."

I think he is too cowardly to engage this crowd and have his closely held beliefs challenged. And yes, they are "beliefs", because they are neither fact nor science.

He has obviously read this page and that comment. I saw the picture of rocks on the “about” page earlier, but now it is gone.

I'm not seeing any change in the otherwise empty "about" and "contact" pages from when this post went up, BTW.

Seriously though, how do you do it? HTML tags?

Well, yes, mainly. This is Wordpress. But the IT monkeys have helpfully removed the standard CSS line advising which tags work, so sometimes you have to poke it with a stick.

Most do, although <pre> is pretty dicey. I don't recall offhand whether <del;> fails, but <s> works.

^ I swear to high heaven that I did not capitalize the 'P' in Wordpress in my previous comment. I definitely did not this time, so here goes nothing.

New comment at Matt's blog post since this afternoon

Matt, you've probably already noticed this, but it looks like you're being targeted by Orac (aka David Gorski) and his team of sycophantic thugs and bullies.

They really have nothing relevant to add to the conversation. The only thing they will do is say, "If you don't follow my dogma, then you're a heretic and should be excommunicated."

Before, I mentioned some of my buddies work in communities with low vaccination rates; one in particular has very, very strong feelings about anti-vax parents.

If the answer isn't "near the east side," I think this would prove most interesting.

^ Crap, I missed the obvious: Is there any word on the ground whether specific screening for Malört might yield a signal?

Narad: "I’m not seeing any change in the otherwise empty “about” and “contact” pages from when this post went up, BTW."

Trust us. Those of us who looked earlier (for me it was during some bout of insomnia), the "about" page was a picture of rocks on a seashore, then later a blank page. The timing of removal may have been due to browser choice. Mine just happens to be Firefox.

It is obvious that Brave Sir Matt is reading this page but will not comment here for obvious fear related issues.

Re Matt's about page: I just looked: A rocky coast, black & white, rather a nice image, I thought. I'm using Chrome.

I just posted versions of my two posts above, about Matt's point #6 and posted them to his blog.

Currently, they are visible to me. But it is late (10:41 PST). I do not expect Matt to reply any time soon.

I am about to shamble off to the snore basket (in the words of my dear late father.) Stand by for further developments.

Orac's minions are among the most educational in all of blogdom.

Trust us. Those of us who looked earlier (for me it was during some bout of insomnia), the “about” page was a picture of rocks on a seashore, then later a blank page.

Having made such errors myself, my no-screen-shots phenomenological "trust" something-something meter is not particularly forgiving. Who's "us"?

The timing of removal may have been due to browser choice.

This doesn't even make sense.

I chose to keep researching when I had my curiosity peaked
Silent, upon a pique in Darien.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 29 Dec 2014 #permalink

You know, given how much I hate spelling pedants who post comments here that are nothing more than spelling, typo, or grammar flames, it took every ounce of my self-control not to go all Orac on Matt's use of "peaked" instead of "piqued." :-)

Matt, you’ve probably already noticed this, but it looks like you’re being targeted by Orac (aka David Gorski) and his team of sycophantic thugs and bullies.

Because to them "criticizing pseudoscience and quackery" = "bullying."

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/11/01/bullying-over-vaccines/

Which portrays a rather shocking (but, sadly, unsurprising) lack of self-awareness:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/05/09/antivaccine-activists-atta…

They really have nothing relevant to add to the conversation. The only thing they will do is say, “If you don’t follow my dogma, then you’re a heretic and should be excommunicated.”

Ah, the old "your science is a religion" trope. When I see that I know Matt really does have nothing intelligent to say.

"Did Thorsen work on vaccine safety studies?
Yes. He is listed as an author on the following vaccine-safety studies. (Note: Thorsen P is listed as a co-author on 128 studies, few having to do with vaccination. I am not sure how common a surname “Thorsen” is in Denmark, or how common “Thorsen P” is. There could be several Thorsen P researchers, just as there are Smith P or Jones P in English-language research venues.)

There's 18 men that are named Poul Thorsen in Denmark, and 3684 individuals P Thorsen.

Poul Thorsen has not been accused of medical misconduct. He is, in fact, still practicing medicine in Denmark. The charges against him for tax evasion were also dropped by the Danish Police.

Given that the fraud occurred in Denmark, at a Danish University - there's not a snowball's chance in hell that he'll ever see extradition to the US for a crime committed on Danish soil - regardless of where the $$$ came from.

So, unlike Wakefield, Thorsen has retained his license, has not been found guilty by a court of law and is continuing to practice medicine in his homeland, rather than fleeing to another country and setting up shop there to bilk families for a shoddy defense fund.

Oh, I'm sorry, in his case it's a defence fund.

it took every ounce of my self-control not to go all Orac on Matt’s use of “peaked” instead of “piqued.

I am sure he is waiting with baited breath!

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

Matt,
This is just in case you are still reading this (and few people could resist, give the circumstances).

As I stated before, it’s up to you to do your own research on the topic.

I did that, and found that the antivaccine movement distorts the facts, grossly misunderstands science, cherry-picks evidence that suits them, ignores evidence that does not and often flatly lies. For example, I think what you wrote about formaldehyde in vaccines, one of my pet peeves, is misleading:

There is evidence that commonly links excessive formaldehyde exposure to cancer. It is a known carcinogen. Again, not something you want being pumped into your young children.

Formaldehyde is only a carcinogen when inhaled, as far as I know. Vaccines, obviously, are not inhaled. It is only toxic when exposure exceed the capacity of the body to metabolize it to formate, CO2, and water.

You clearly know, since you mentioned it, that the human body generates and safely deals with far more formaldehyde than there is in any vaccine. One study "calculated that the daily turnover of formaldehyde would be 31-59 g/day", mostly from the breakdown of methylated amino acids and methanol in our diets. That means our bodies happily deal with over 31,000 milligrams of formaldehyde each and every day; that's at least 310,000 times more formaldehyde than is present in any vaccine. That very clearly is not the "excessive formaldehyde exposure" that is linked to cancer, is it?

In any case, how can 0.1 milligrams of formaldehyde in a vaccine be dangerous when many foods naturally contain formaldehyde: apples contain up to 22.3 mg/kg, pears up to 60 mg/kg and dried shiitake mushrooms up to 406 mg/kg.

Isn't it deliberately misleading to claim that formaldehyde in vaccines can possibly do any harm? Is what I wrote in any way bullying or an accusation of heresy?

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

Stephanie Seneff is at it again; she's the author of that "Roundup will make 50% of children autistic by 2025!!" junk paper that Den!s mentioned upthread. Apparently this one is even worse than her previous magnum crappus; she actually cites Wakefield's retracted papers, according to this account: http://www.examiner.com/article/bogus-paper-on-roundup-saturates-the-in…

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

Oh, and Seralini's retracted paper too!

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

"pour over" instead of "pore over" too.

Here's some more misinformation from Matt:

What they fail to acknowledge(and typically ignore if asked) is that a vaccine containing up to 850 mcg of aluminum administered via intramuscular injection is not the same as ingesting small amounts of aluminum via the digestive track.

I won't ignore it - in terms of aluminum ending up in the bloodstream, which is what is important, IM injection and ingestion are very similar. As has been discussed here many times before, the insoluble aluminum salts suspended in some vaccines slowly dissolve in the interstitial fluid in the muscle and are released into the blood at about the same rate as aluminum is absorbed into the blood from food, and are quickly excreted. A child's kidneys can excrete very much larger amounts of aluminum without any problems, and blood aluminum levels after vaccination barely increase, never remotely approaching a toxic level, which is typically 100 times that seen post vaccination.

The EPA recommends a daily consumption limit of 25 mcg.

I can't find an EPA daily consumption limit for aluminum, just a limit for cosmetic effects (i.e. discoloration) in drinking water of 200 micrograms per liter, though since the average daily intake of aluminum in the US from food, air and water is up to 700 micrograms in infants, and up to 8,200 micrograms in adults, I don't believe the safe "daily consumption limit" is 25 µg/day.

Perhaps he is referring to FDA regulations for aluminum in IV fluids, which is 25 µg/L, not 25 µg/day. This limit is to prevent accumulation of aluminum, particularly in those with impaired renal function, who are given these IV fluids continually for days or even months. Contamination of IV fluids with aluminum leads to greatly elevated blood levels after they have been administered for long periods, hence the regulations. Comparing this with one-off intramuscular shots is clearly misleading.

According to the CHoP Vaccine Education Center (PDF), "During the first 6 months of life, infants could receive about 4 milligrams of aluminum from vaccines". That works out to 22 micrograms per day, slowly leaching into the bloodstream, below the FDA safety limits for IV fluids which includes a large safety margin.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

Krebiozen quoting the antivaccine loon @ #95 -

The EPA recommends a daily consumption limit of 25 mcg.

Gee, I guess the makers of Gaviscon® have been paying off the EPA since their Extra Strength product contains 160000 ug Al(OH)3 per tablet and the recommended dose is: "chew 2-4 tablets four times a day or as directed by a doctor".
That's 320000 to 640000 micrograms of pure poison just to treat a sour stomach!!!111!!!

It must all be part of Agenda 711 depopulation plan as elucidated by the Uzbekistan Guide Stones®.
Add that to all the Al raining down on us from Kemtrailz and now you'll understand just how eevyil these people are...

http://www.gaviscon.com/how-gaviscon-works/antacid-products
http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/drugInfo.cfm?setid=7f367927-c366-4…

Antivaccine loons never cease to amaze with their abject ignorance.

Have fun.

More than once, when somebody refused to give any sources, I responded by asking why they were deliberately withholding information that they believed could save human lives. Phrasing things in ethical and moral terms seems to have some effect, at least.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

For Seneff fans

(I've eliminated some of the links)

All of the coverage seems to stem from a talk Seneff Gave October 23, 2014, at the "holistic-focused Groton Wellness organization.”

Original coverage of the talk was at The Mind Unleashed, written by Nick Meyer.

“Seneff presented slides showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the rising use of Roundup (with its active ingredient glyphosate) on crops and the rising rates of autism; while it doesn’t show a direct correlation it does give researchers plenty to think about, especially considering Seneff’s research into the side effects of autism that mimic glyphosate toxicity and deficiencies."

And Groton Wellness is definitely at the cutting edge of research:

WHERE, WHEN AND HOW YOU’LL BECOME WHOLLY RESTORED.

"Groton Wellness Center is the first holistic center of its kind in New England, synergistically fusing state-of-the-art Biological Dentistry with Integrative Medicine to meet the health needs of the whole person. We are professionals in preventative and functional medicine, dental care, psychology, nutrition, and a host of complementary and alternative therapies. We work with you to develop a personal, comprehensive plan that achieves wellness and balance from head to toe. This is our mission."
http://www.grotonwellness.com/medical/practitioners

PRACTITIONERS
Sarika Arora, MD - Hormone Balancing
Irina Serebryakova, NP - Holistic Nurse Practitioner
Joshua Lloyd, ND - Naturopathy and Lyme Disease
Kenyon Keily - Herbalism
Grace Ramsey Coolidge, LMHC Heart and Energy Based Psychotherapy
Elisabeth Horesh, Lic.Ac. - Acupuncture and Fertility
Quan Zhou, Lic.Ac. - Acupuncture and Nutrition
Vera Sacks, HHP, EAV
Linda Cox, Certified Health Coach
Ann Barker, BSN, RN, LMT, CTT Thermography
Sue Lunt, RN, Certified Health Coach

Anyone wanting to look at the slides can go to

http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/glyphosate/Groton_Seneff.pdf

@Liz Ditz

In that bit about Thorsen, Matt reveals that he has not actually done his own research, but rather simply read and regurgitated what other anti-vaccine folks have written about Thorsen. To wit: Poul Thorsen is not wanted by the FBI. Matt would have discovered this if he'd bothered going to the FBI's web site and used the handy little search option over on the lower right.

Matt, if you are reading, since you so strongly stress the TruthTM, I expect that you will promptly amend your post to correct your error, stating clearly that Thorsen is not, in fact, wanted by the FBI.

About "Matt" & his statement that it's difficult to access VAERS data... He likely would want to dissuade any of his readers from actually delving deep into VAERS data because they would see the lack of objectivity, and in many cases, total inanity of many of the submissions!

VAERS #379570: “…patient accidentally fell in open well (granite quarry filled with water), drowned and expired. This event occurred 49 days of receiving first dose of GARDASIL."

synergistically fusing state-of-the-art Biological Dentistry with Integrative Medicine to meet the health needs of the whole person

"Miss Teatime withdrew the sheet from the machine and carefully read it through. From time to time she nodded to herself. Plenty of capital letters. Excellent. Devotion to upper case, she had noticed, was one of the more consistent characteristics of Life Force enthusiasts."

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

s this rusky hairy (Harrison??) Rat one bogus also, Antaeus Feldspar #93 ??

We can't tell, Tim, for all you have linked to is a press release promising that a study "is expected to be published in three months (July 2010)".

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

All of the coverage seems to stem from a talk Seneff Gave October 23, 2014, at the “holistic-focused Groton Wellness organization.”

Nah, if you look at the other slide sets on her CSAIL site, she's been doing this for a while. Her 2014 Autism One performance was in May.

(Oh and, Examiner? "It is now pretty much accepted that bee colony collapse is caused by neonicotinoid pesticides." Try again.)

Hooboy, that Responsible Technology site is a piece of work. The testimonials at the bottom of the page are a Who's Who of crankery with one advertising exec thrown in for good measure.

By Pareidolius (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

WTF does the "rusky hairy rat" study have to do with anything, Tim? Are you claiming that you don't understand why citing ANY retracted papers torpedoes Seneff's credibility?

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 30 Dec 2014 #permalink

As has been discussed here many times before, the insoluble aluminum salts suspended in some vaccines slowly dissolve in the interstitial fluid in the muscle and are released into the blood at about the same rate as aluminum is absorbed into the blood from food, and are quickly excreted.

I only got a little way through the Al-adjuvant paper (from 2004) during my public-transit "happening" this afternoon, but I'm reminded that I'm unclear about whether there is a balance between (1) phagocytic uptake of still-adsorbed antigen and (2) immune noticing of dissociated antigen – with subseqent IM Al loneliness – or whether the former has gone overboard in the decade since Lindblad (2004).

^ Oh, crap, I left out "from #897 in the Vinuxplosion" from "the ... paper."

We can’t tell, Tim, for all you have linked to is a press release promising that a study “is expected to be published in three months (July 2010)”.

"Earlier this year, Surov co-authored a paper in Doklady Biological Sciences [sic] showing that in rare instances, hair grows inside recessed pouches in the mouths of hamsters."

This finding strikes me as lacking some teeth.*

* Not for the squeamish.

I have a naÏve question I am hoping some of the commentarian can answer with some authority.

Image four 15 year old children, Ursula, Ulf, Violet, and Victor. Ursula and Ulf were unvaccinated and had measles at age 5. Violet and Victor had the two-dose MMR series, with the second dose given at age 5.

For the purposes of this scenario, all 4 had to have titers drawn.

Would the titer results be able to tell which child had measles, and which had the vaccine?

Commentariat

When oh when (if ever) will the preview feature return?

When oh when (if ever) will the preview feature return?

A safe bet is "never"; it's not built into WP, and SB Labs has a long track record of not being able to competently deploy even the stuff that is.

@Liz #111
Not as far as I am aware. The antibody measured is IgG, and the assay is unable to distinguish between vaccine and naturally produced antibody.

Oh well,I suppose that this is as as good a place as any.
..
prior to embarking upon my year's end festivities (, they're probably a lot milder than you'd imagine- and that I'd prefer) as I initiate my thrice weekly hair ritual - which involves several precisely timed and measured procedures- to waste time as the oil sinks in, I took a little stroll around anti-vax-ville and lo! and behold! it appears that they've been busy ( but not in a good way).

- Wayne Rohde plugged his book @ PRN ( Gary Null Show, yesterday, tape, about 42 minutes in- right after the host's insanely protracted advert for his own brand of healthy, over-priced candy bars)- he explains the vaccine court in excruciating detail. Just what you've always wanted to know,

- KIm Stagliano has a spectacular hissy fit ( AoA, today) about the reportage of the Chicago Tribune over the years ( listing articles) and isn't too pleased with the AAP either. Notice how she calls a reporter 'a cupcake' whilst she isn't exactly Simone de Beauvoir herself.

- I didn't bother with TMR as everything is recycled this week.

- and last, but certainly not least, Jake Crosby hands out his annual awards in a manner that highlights his own so-called investigative reports about various people and incidents upon which he has fixated or perseverated.

-btw- Reuben ( the Poxes) discusses the recent brouhaha concerning comments @ AI @ ET.

Time to wash my hair.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 31 Dec 2014 #permalink

Fascinating, Narad. Thx. And I'm not 'sqeamish' at all... I'm vasovegal with increasing frequency of lack of arterial pulse.

Speaking of antivax idiots:

My daughters and I are visiting family in my home town, and I thought of going to the IMAX today. They're playing Grand Canyon Adventure. Great! I'm doing a backpacking trip in the Grand Canyon in a few weeks. Sadly, It's starring RFK Jr.
- the one hole bigger than the canyon.

TB, I can't imagine somebody actually having RFK narrate anything. He possesses one of the most unpleasant speaking voices I've ever heard, at once whiney and screechy, like the ghost of his grandmother lives down his windpipe. While I find his devotion to the environment (as long as it doesn't incovenience him) laudable, his grasp of science, well, I think we all know how flimsy that is.

By Pareidolius (not verified) on 31 Dec 2014 #permalink

@Denice - interested in your "thrice weekly hair ritual" - my hair is hip length and I am always looking for ways to tweak my own care. Mostly I focus on gentle shampoo and plenty of conditioner. Oil? Which one?

Do you ever wonder if the whole hair care thing has its own level of woo?

Not as far as I am aware. The antibody measured is IgG, and the assay is unable to distinguish between vaccine and naturally produced antibody.

If you want to get fancier, though, you could try subtyping.

@ Mrs Woo:

I am always pleased to share hair advice as I have been fighting the good fight for a long time.

First of all, to answer your question, there is a lot of woo about hair- avoid toxin chemicals, use all natural products and herbs, reverse hair loss and greying, restore its natural beauty etc.
Mikey sells his own products that remove cleaning agents that most general companies utilise ( see his website's store). Null claims he can reverse hair loss and greying through diet- and he has a study to prove it ( an article is available). Both he and Mercola sell over-priced hair products ( see websites' stores)
There is a wealth of crap around the net..

For my own reality-based regime, I buy olive oil in the food store ( and spray-on argan oil from a general hair product line) which I leave on for variable amounts of time - ( based on my schedule) keeping the oil away from the roots and then, wash it out with shampoo I like based largely on fragrance. I let it dry without combing and then, spray on *Chi* (tm) ( hydrolysed keratin mist) or a similar product- and if I am expected somewhere fashionable, I add a curl-defining crème. * Et voila!* - it looks passable.

I don't keep it extremely long, but oil is the secret the longer it is.
Other general advice: straight hair is easier to manage and people who want to cover/ dye grey should NEVER do-it-themselves if it is dark brown or black- you need a pro.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 01 Jan 2015 #permalink

@Denice - thank you. Nothing novel, then. Lately I have been really bad about getting it cut (can't remember last time I sat in a salon chair), and have decided I am more likely to find a good set of hair shears online, have them delivered and trim off my own damage than manage to be bothered making regular appointments (good thing my most regular companions are horses, chickens and other livestock?).

The argan oil I tried seemed slightly drying, which I decided might be from fragrance/type or amount of alcohol in it and I quit using it after a few times. Still looking for the right formulation I guess.

On hair woo - the most ironic is that they go on about chemicals, then recommend lye soap or baking soda paste. What exactly do they think "chemicals" are?

@ Mrs Woo:

I shall forever be grateful to a young gay man- hair cutter- who taught me how to CUT MY OWN by pulling it up over the top of my head- carefully- and cutting across, creating an infinity of layers - and then trimming the bottom separately. People think I pay someone real money for it. Hard to believe but true.
It's easy to really long hair it's- all geometry.

-btw- Mike is no longer selling the shampoo/ conditioner but has pet shampoo,

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 01 Jan 2015 #permalink

Man, I'm so glad I shave my head. ;)

KIm Stagliano has a spectacular hissy fit ( AoA, today) about the reportage of the Chicago Tribune over the years

It was cute that Conrick stepped in to bolster Stagliano's shreiking about bra shopping with... a report showing that, from introduction through 2005 June, the incidence of AERS reports of gynecomastia with risperidone was 1 per 686,331 prescriptions (total population; there's not enough information to break out adolescents).

@Denice - a friend probably showed me the same thing probably 25 years ago, or at least something similar. As long as my hair is, I am slightly afraid of ruining it.

@liz/Narad.
Interesting that about measles IgG4 subclass antibodies.

The reason as to why vaccination does not provoke a higher response in these is thought by the authors to relate to the age at which kids are likely to get vaccine vs the age they usually get natural infection. But this paper looks at responses back in the day when only one shot was given at around 1yr, and no booster later on.

That being the case, I wonder what the IgG4 subclasses would be if this experimant were repeated. Perhaps the IgG4 levels would be much higher, and comparable to those from natural infection, and therefore not useful as a way to distinguish vaxed from natural immunity?

PS: Learning point for antivaxers: The primary protection against measles is from IgG1, levels of which are very good and durable both post vaccine and post natural measles, so please don't quote this article as "proof" that vaccine immunity is useless.

Josh wrote:

From a pro-vaxer to all you anti's - why do you assume that we haven't done the research? You say you've done the research and have made the decision that not vaccinating is best for your family. Great - I don't have a problem with that. But that doesn't make the rest of us uneducated nuts that just need to see the light. Would you be okay with us doing the research and making the decision to vaccinate because that's what we think is right for our family? Because believe it or not that's actually the case for most of us; again this might shock you but we love out children too!

And Matt responded:

Josh, Great point. I had a similar conversation with a very close friend of mine recently. I'll tell you the same thing I told him:

I'm not pushing anyone to be anti-vax. That's your choice, just like it should be my choice to not vaccinate. My extensive research has led me to 100% inward belief that vaccines are not the best thing for my family, and I should be able to make that decision as the head of my household. Unfortunately my beliefs are in the minority, and some people - wealthy, influential people - have expressed a very public desire to have my kids vaccinated against my will, for reasons I strongly believe are unethical. If these people have their way - and they are slowly forcing their way into our every lives - my children could be taken from me for something as trivial as not vaccinating my children. Put yourself in my shoes: that would terrify you like it terrifies me. In order to avoid this this, I need to do everything I can to be proactive.

This includes writing a summary of my beliefs to base my stance. It just so happens that millions of people feel the same way I do, and we're starting to come out of the shadows and multiply in voice. Our goal is awareness. My goal is not to push my beliefs on others, it is to raise awareness in those that perhaps haven't studied at all and haven't heard my side. My goal is to encourage others on my side to speak up. Not to be afraid of scrutiny, but to be courageous for their kids and our future generations.

Surely if you've done your research you realize that there are indeed risks. My family has decided not to take those risks. We've chosen to boost our immune systems naturally instead of artificially. We don't expect you to do the same, but we expect that you respect our decision. We have raised valid questions regarding popular vaccine points that have not been answered. We have asked for proofs that haven't yet been proved. We feel strongly vindicated in our decision. We respect your decision, even though we might not agree with it. We are tolerant even though we receive much intolerance in return.

It is at this point quite an unfair fight that we never even asked for. Please respect our position, and we can respect yours.

Unfortunately, my close friend and I stopped being friends that night, not by my choice.

And it just so happens this all stemmed from reading this blog.

Extensive research = I read a bunch of AV sites.

Millions of people feel = therefore my beliefs are correct.

wealthy, influential people - have expressed a very public desire to have my kids vaccinated against my will = what? Is this a veiled reference to Gates?

valid questions regarding popular vaccine points that have not been answered = haven't been answered the way I feel they should.

Sorry, blockquote fail.

Another comment:

Most of the attacks on Matt are coming from the same origin as stated. The Orac trolls from a couple 'skeptics' websites not deserving a name mention. They are probably paid, but if they're not then they've got serious cognitive dissonance issues.

Vaccines have been fully exposed as a fraudulent and ineffective by now, yet the skeptics society is darn hell bent at protecting their fairy tale position on herd immunity. Pharma is probably financing these attacks.

Where are my $hill bux?

I'll never get used to the jaw-droppingly ignorant statements that emanate from the anti-vaccine brigade.

Vaccines have been fully exposed as a fraudulent and ineffective by now, yet the skeptics society is darn hell bent at protecting their fairy tale position on herd immunity.

What kind of person writes something like this? Are they unaware of all the safety and efficacy studies? The epidemiological evidence? Where did measles and smallpox go? Why has chicken pox all but vanished in the US, but remains endemic in the UK?

Even more mind-boggling, how can anyone deny herd immunity exists? Not only is it supported by mountains of evidence, but it's simple common sense. If one person in a community of 100 gets measles, if the other 99 are immune, through either vaccination or natural immunity, the disease cannot spread; if none of them are immune, almost all of them will get measles. That's herd immunity in a nutshell. How can anyone deny this?

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 02 Jan 2015 #permalink

Reading Matt's blog would probably be helpful to anyone seeking to lose weight this year because his writing will induce vomiting.

It should be MY choice to not vaccinate. MY extensive research has led ME to 100% inward belief that vaccines are not the best thing for MY family, and I should be able to make that decision as the head of MY household. Unfortunately MY beliefs are in the MINORITY..., It just so happens that MILLIONS OF PEOPLE feel the same way I do, and WE'RE starting to come out of the shadows and MULTIPLY in voice.

You have to hand it to Matt. It takes a certain talent to move bargain-basement Randian exceptional-individualism-persecuted-by-the-gray-masses to argumentum ad populum in the next paragraph. Kind melts the special snowflake.

[edited] If these people forcing their way into our lives have their way my children could be taken from me for something as trivial as not vaccinating my children.

I don't suppose Matt has citations for anyone making such proposals. Heck, I don't want to do the Googling he have me do, so I'll DIY.

Great idea, Matt! See,you don't own you kids, and the decisions you get to make about their health issues as domestic patriarch do not include any damn thing you please, including relating to life-and-death issues of their health. Read you Rand dude, and consider that your kids have individual rights, too!

Your children SHOULD be taken for not-vaccinating them, because that's the opposite of trivial for them. But then, it's not just your kids. It's all the other kids, and grown-ups too who are VPD vulnerable you're putting at risk with your selfish actions threatening public health. For that, you should be in jail.

[Just kidding about the jail. I'd prefer restorative to retributive justice, so we'll just sentence you to community service setting up immunization clinics in poor neighborhoods with at-risk kids.]

@Krebiozen

how can anyone deny herd immunity exists?

I suspect part of it comes from people misunderstanding the term, either out of perversity or ignorance. In the example of one person who catches measles in a population of 100, the fact that the rest of the population was immune conferred no benefit on the one who actually caught the measles. Their immunity was not conferred upon the non-immunized individual, thus the herd was not immune.

Perusing the net, there appears to be an argument that vaccines don't provide as good a "permanent" immunity as catching the actual disease does, and if you're not re-exposed periodically (say, by frequent epidemics) then the actual level of immunization within the population will be lower than it appears base on immunization records. This would lead to requiring higher vaccination rates and more boosters to achieve the same immunization results as, say, making sure that 80% of the population catches measles before age 5. Not being an expert, it is unclear to me if this argument has any merit - however, it would certainly seem to indicate that we should have more, not less, vaccination. After all, the goal (it would seem to me) would be to have less disease, not stronger immunization in disease survivors.

By Mephistopheles… (not verified) on 02 Jan 2015 #permalink

"It should be MY choice to not vaccinate. MY extensive research has led ME to 100% inward belief that vaccines are not the best thing for MY family, and I should be able to make that decision as the head of MY household. "

Likewise, it should be my choice pf whether or not to stop at red lights. I have an 120% inward belief that not stopping is better for me and my family, but for some reason those darn police (and child protective agency) keep messing with me. They must be shills!

@ Thomas

Likewise, it should be my choice pf whether or not to stop at red lights. I have an 120% inward belief that not stopping is better for me and my family, but for some reason those darn police (and child protective agency) keep messing with me. They must be shills!

For big traffic-light?

"For big traffic-light?" Of course! It makes me see red whenever I think of those big traffic-light shills raking in the green, and about the yellow journalists who cover up for them.

In related news, Kent Heckenlively – who apparently can't think of anything else to do – continues to pimp his Mikovits joint, this time with an utterly incoherent chapter summary that includes a time-traveling convalescent serum and airborne XMRV. It has to be seen to be believed.

@ Narad:

Oh I know. It rivals Blaxsted's speculation about Freud's patients.

@ Thomas:
Ha ha ha.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 02 Jan 2015 #permalink

" It makes me see red whenever I think of those big traffic-light shills raking in the green, and about the yellow journalists who cover up for them."

I wonder what Matt's driving record is like. Obviously, those red lights <—— Obama. Why do you think they're Red! Connect the dots people! Big guvment Commie tyranny is right under your nose! Don't tread on Matt! Don't you understand? He has CHILDREN to protect!

I get how much this guy makes all of our collective blood boil with his errant stupidity, but it is almost a waste of our time to make fun of his misguided beliefs. It's tough to argue with anti-vaxxers because no matter what we say or what we do or what evidence we show them, there is always some rebuttal or fallback position that validates their position and nullifies ours. Scientists could conduct the highly unethical study they request and a child could die as a result of a disease contracted and they still would not accept the results. They would still find fault with it. I am thoroughly convinced that it is a huge waste of time to even argue with anti-vaxxers as much as I want to try to do the right thing. They will never ever ever believe the converse opinion to their own unless their unvaccinated gets seriously ill or dies. Even then, it would be the fault of big pharma or some other boogey man. As sad as it makes me to know there really are people out there who are completely insane and blissfully unaware of how ignorant they are (or in some cases rejoice in their ignorance), I just do not have the time or energy to argue with them anymore.

By Pittsburgh (not verified) on 04 Jan 2015 #permalink

Jemima, do tell us how much money the USA would save if vaccines were no longer given to children. Provide us the economic analysis that it would be cheaper to treat diseases instead of preventing them.

Some things to keep in mind: before vaccination every child would get measles, and recently in Wales about one in twelve cases required hospital care. Also, your article was only about influenza (by the way there are no adjuvants in American influenza vaccine), a disease that as so far this year killed at least fifteen children.

Now we are expecting a link to real and verified economic analysis showing that allowing diphtheria, measles, chicken pox, polio, etc. to come back would be much cheaper than preventing them. Something like this: Economic Evaluation of the Routine Childhood Immunization Program in the United States, 2009.

Please post that economic analysis in less than forty eight hours. Thank you.

Oh, I forgot. As part of your economic analysis I should tell you that I got a flu vaccine at my local pharmacy. Insurance paid for it, but without insurance it would have been a "staggering" $30.

I will now use our household income because the company provides sick leave, but the amount of money earned by college age child as a part time retail store employee: $10/hour, no benefits.

Since the flu would require at least a week off, and they work twenty hours of week, that would be $200 of lost income. All because the flu vaccine had this "horribly high" cost of $30 (the child got the flu vaccine at doctor's office as part of another appt, covered by insurance).

So really, explain to me how much cheaper it is to treat a disease instead of preventing it.

We need vaccines for what reason?

Because they reduce the incidence and severity of certain diseases. Thanks for asking!

By Mephistopheles… (not verified) on 04 Jan 2015 #permalink

We need vaccines for what reason?

On the off chance that you actually read your source, I can only conclude that you are expressing some sort of petulant objection to pandemic preparedness.

Oops, just found a typo: "I will notw use our household income"

Jemima: Well, if it hadn't been for people like you, the NHL wouldn't be sidelined right now. That's a lot of money being lost, both by the players, the advertisers and the stadiums.

By Politicalguineapig (not verified) on 04 Jan 2015 #permalink

We need vaccines for what reason?
We need [ seatbelts / a fire service / food hygiene regulations ] for what reason?

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 04 Jan 2015 #permalink

if it hadn’t been for people like you, the NHL wouldn’t be sidelined right now

You don't say.

Narad: There's an outbreak of mumps among the NHL players this year. All of whom were apparently affected by the Wakefield panic, or whose parents 'forgot' to get the boosters for them.

By Politicalguineapig (not verified) on 05 Jan 2015 #permalink

This piece reeks so much of arrogance and sarcasm that I can't even take you seriously. A smart, informative, and less snarky retort would have held more weight with me. I'm sick of the back-and-forth hatred spewing crap coming from both sides of this argument.

Here is what we know FOR SURE about vaccine safety... practically nothing. Some people thinks that it's lunacy to vaccinate knowing so little. Others thinks it's worth the risk to keep themselves and their kids safe from disease. There is just too much data being tracked (or not) by too many (or too few) people to really get a good grasp on what vaccines do or don't do. It's like education standards testing. Good grief, the statistics are staggering for both. And for both, there are people firmly camped on either side with some "on the fence."

I think it's time for a little civility in the vaccine debate. I encourage you to be the bigger person and go first. Take the lead! Then at least you can say that you didn't dive into the pile of muck with those you disagree with.

And before you write me off, my friend is a director with the CDC. I also have friends that swear their kids autism/health issues/etc. were caused by vaccines. I'm neither pro- nor anti-vaccine. I'm just pro civil discourse.

@PGP

I would not chalk up the NHL mumps outbreak to Wakefieldian anti-vaccinationism. Many of the NHL players are of an age where the second MMR had not yet been added to the vaccination schedule, so some may have had a sub-par response to the vaccine. Also recall that of the three viruses contained in the vaccine, the mumps strain has the lowest response overall, having an effectiveness somewhere in the 80s% after two doses. Add to that atrocious personal hygiene among NHL players (e.g. sharing water bottles, spit flying about, etc.) and you have a recipe for rapid disease transmission. There are other factors at play, but at the very least, this is one instance where we can't really blame Wakefield et al.

Once again, you oversimplify and misconstrue the facts.

Once again, you oversimplify and misconstrue the facts.

I can't decide whether the notion that NHL players are paid per game or the failure to notice that not a single game has been canceled struck me as more amazing.

"I would not chalk up the NHL mumps outbreak to Wakefieldian anti-vaccinationism."

I haven't seen any direct evidence of antivax beliefs being expressed, but there are certainly indications of stupidity on the subject of immunization and infectious disease.

For instance, my local NHL team has been decimated by injuries this season, yet most players apparently are avoiding mumps boosters, for reasons including the fact that they just don't take the disease seriously (despite the fact that a number of their colleagues have missed games and that mumps in older males can have serious implications).

It would be truly bizarre if athletes who aren't bothered by losing multiple teeth to high-velocity pucks and elbows, are simultaneously scared of a (non-slap) shot.

By Dangerous Bacon (not verified) on 05 Jan 2015 #permalink

@Narad

Well, there's that, too.

Isn't mumps in adult males a cause of sterility?

Here is what we know FOR SURE about vaccine safety… practically nothing.

Utter nonsense. Seriously. This is the most ridiculous thing I've heard i a long time. We know a lot about vaccine safety.

And before you write me off, my friend is a director with the CDC.

I'd be willing to bet your friend has nothing to do with the Office of Infectious Diseases, the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, or the Immunization Services Division at the CDC. Even if your friend is in the CDC, so what? It's a non sequitur. It proves nothing about your claimed objectivity. In fact, I'll go one step further. I don't believe you when you say you aren't anti-vaccine, because I've never seen anyone but an antivaxer claim that we don't know anything for sure about vaccine safety, a claim that is just plain wrong on so many levels. You might think you're not antivaccine, but you talk the talk and walk the walk.

Your concern trolling is duly noted, however. One wonders if you've commented on Matt's blog and taken him and his commenters to task for their lack of civility as well.

This piece reeks so much of arrogance and sarcasm that I can’t even take you seriously.

You'd think the name of the blog would have given Kathy some sort of warning.

A smart, informative, and less snarky retort would have held more weight with me.

The concern-trolling is missing the part about being driven by the incivility to embrace the opposite camp . I have to deduct points for that.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 05 Jan 2015 #permalink

Kathy: "I think it’s time for a little civility in the vaccine debate."

Why? As I pointed out in another thread, your side doesn't take science seriously at all, and is rich enough to escape the economic consequences of caring for a sick youngster. In addition, some of the most prominent anti-vaxxers are chronic liars and straight up bullies. There might be a nice anti-vaxxer somewhere, but I doubt it. Being civil is a fool's errand.

Todd: Okay, my bad. I had wondered if Wakefield had found a toe hold in Finland ever since the story broke, but I guess he didn't.

Narad: Uh, most of my teams out, and I don't pay all that much attention to sports. Secondly, I meant that the players would lose endorsements and the stadiums would lose money for every game not played.

By Politicalguineapig (not verified) on 05 Jan 2015 #permalink

Uh, most of my teams out, and I don’t pay all that much attention to sports.

The lamely named Wild? As of December 15, 10% of the team had contracted the mumps (Suter, Ballard, Scandella, Brodin, and Folin). Suter missed two games.

Secondly, I meant that the players would lose endorsements

Why? Do you have the slightest idea how these work?

and the stadiums would lose money for every game not played.

Which is exactly zero, which didn't prevent you from flatly stating that

That’s a lot of money being lost, both by the players, the advertisers and the stadiums.

You said something stupid. Deal with it.

When will people learn NUTRITION BOOSTS IMMUNITY via breastmilk, probiotics, Vit D3, Vit C. Naturally
The power that made the body heals the body
Holy shit the ignorance is stunning with you people!

Vaccines are drugs that do not work in harmony with the body

NUTRITION NUTRITION NUTRITiON
Epi Genetics.

Use your noodles for the love of god. SHEESH

Use your noodles for the love of god.

RAMEN.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 05 Jan 2015 #permalink

iliya, please post the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that treating polio, measles, mumps, Hib, hepatitis, pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus, etc with just nutrition is cheaper, safer and more effective than preventing the diseases with vaccines.

Probiotics are nutrition now?

By justthestats (not verified) on 05 Jan 2015 #permalink

Poor Kathy. She forgot that she wrote this:
"This piece reeks so much of arrogance and sarcasm that I can’t even take you seriously. "

by the time she said this " I’m just pro civil discourse."

I'm sorry Kathy - I just can't take you seriously.

Please tell your friends in the CDC (and the ones in the UN, the White House, and the Vatican) "Hello" from me. I met them when we were at Davos last year.

When will people learn NUTRITION BOOSTS IMMUNITY

How is immunity measured and how do you know exactly what boosts it? Please be specific.

NUTRITION NUTRITION NUTRITiON

Sounds like the chorus from a song from "A Baker on the Roof".

Use your noodles for the love of god.

Would that be the Flying Spaghetti Monster (may you be touched by his noodly appendage!).

By Mephistopheles… (not verified) on 05 Jan 2015 #permalink

First of all 70% of your immune cells are found in the gut. Thus the need for optimal bacteria balance. this can be achieved via probiotics for adults and infants. According to the pasteur institute in France 98% of immune responses triggered at the early stages of infection are non specific. These non specific response had been observed following different infections by viruses, bacteria, parasites and fungi" Thus the innate or natural immune system affords 98% of early response to an infectious agent, while the adaptive or memory based response that vaccination seeks to stimulate represents only 2% of early response" What's worse, the vaccine response can "blow back" causing loss of self-tolerance and, via the resultant Th2 dominant immune system, the body can attack itself (auto-immunity). In the meantime, the first line of defense against infection (Th1) is compromised and this "front door" can be left wide open to unmet infectious challenges. We dont need specific antibodies to every little disease. Flawed science. We need a STRONG HOST or overall general immune system. For studies on all of this please go to Greenmedinfo.com everything there is linked to studies that back all this up. I am a 15 year veteran of the nutrition industry so I KNOW nutrition works. Also There is NO motive to be an Anti Vaxxer. Its called the truth. Vaccines are for fearful people who are scared and dont know any better or dont have the time to know any better. Its all out there get informed and get educated about how incredibly powerful nutrition is in your life and your kids. PS I just had a son 2 weeks ago and there is no way he is getting vaccinated no way Breast milk,probiotics, Vit D3 and Vit c will support him. Take your needles and chemicals and side effects and shove it.

iliya, what kind of dressing do you want on your word salad?

Where are those PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers I asked for?

So exactly how does breastfeeding protect a twenty year old hockey player from mumps? Are you now going to donate your breast milk to the NHL so that no more of their players end up with mumps?

First of all 70% of your immune cells are found in the gut.

citation needed

Thus the need for optimal bacteria balance. this can be achieved via probiotics for adults and infants.

You're stating medical advices based on a statement without citation?

According to the pasteur institute in France 98% of immune responses triggered at the early stages of infection are non specific. These non specific response had been observed following different infections by viruses, bacteria, parasites and fungi” Thus the innate or natural immune system affords 98% of early response to an infectious agent, while the adaptive or memory based response that vaccination seeks to stimulate represents only 2% of early response”.

citation needed, by the author(s) of the statement, not the pasteur institute unless the institute is listed as an author of a scientific paper.

What’s worse, the vaccine response can “blow back” causing loss of self-tolerance and, via the resultant Th2 dominant immune system, the body can attack itself (auto-immunity). In the meantime, the first line of defense against infection (Th1) is compromised and this “front door” can be left wide open to unmet infectious challenges. We dont need specific antibodies to every little disease. Flawed science. We need a STRONG HOST or overall general immune system.

citation needed (again!?!?). Also, do explain to me how you found out that we don't need specific antibody to each diseases? Did you test this (in an animal or human)? And if not, why?

For studies on all of this please go to Greenmedinfo.com everything there is linked to studies that back all this up.

Greenmedinfo is not a medical journal because, first, it is not indexed in pubmed.gov and second, there are no description of the admin review process to indicate if there is any difference between scientific peer-review and the greenmedinfo's admin review. If you have any reason to dispute my finding, say so and back up your assertions with documented evidence

I am a 15 year veteran of the nutrition industry so I KNOW nutrition works. Also There is NO motive to be an Anti Vaxxer. Its called the truth. Vaccines are for fearful people who are scared and dont know any better or dont have the time to know any better. Its all out there get informed and get educated about how incredibly powerful nutrition is in your life and your kids.

Have you considered how you might be wrong? What we can infer from your writing is that you are looking for confirmation bias while the scientific method work toward elimination of biases and thus that very statement: I KNOW nutrition works is proof that you don't use the inductive method to determine if you are right or wrong and that you stopped learning.

PS I just had a son 2 weeks ago and there is no way he is getting vaccinated no way Breast milk,probiotics, Vit D3 and Vit c will support him. Take your needles and chemicals and side effects and shove it.

more proof that you have stopped learning and you are resting on your laurels.

Alain

PS I just had a son 2 weeks ago and there is no way he is getting vaccinated no way Breast milk,probiotics, Vit D3 and Vit c will support him. Take your needles and chemicals and side effects and shove it.

You are aware that vitamins are chemicals, right? And that breast milk and probiotics are made of chemicals?

According to the pasteur institute in France 98% of immune responses triggered at the early stages of infection are non specific.

No, they recanted this on their deathbed.

According to the pasteur institute in France 98% of immune responses triggered at the early stages of infection are non specific. These non specific response had been observed following different infections by viruses, bacteria, parasites and fungi” Thus the innate or natural immune system affords 98% of early response to an infectious agent, while the adaptive or memory based response that vaccination seeks to stimulate represents only 2% of early response

The "natural immunity" of which antivaxxers are so fond has exactly the same effect, right?

@iliya:

According to the pasteur institute in France 98% of immune responses triggered at the early stages of infection are non specific.

True, but completely irrelevant. What happens is when the body detects an infection, its first response is to activate everything, sort of like a country under attack mobilising its whole military. Once the body works out what the attacker is, it stands down the unneeded parts of the immune system, using only those parts it should.

By Julian Frost (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

iliya,

We dont need specific antibodies to every little disease. Flawed science. We need a STRONG HOST or overall general immune system.

Why do you believe this? Native Americans lived a healthy lifestyle, ate organic food, breathed clean air, got plenty of exercise and drank unpolluted water. Their immune systems must have been highly robust. Yet when they were exposed to European viruses they died in their thousands. How is that possible if good nutrition prevents these diseases or reduces their adverse effects?

For studies on all of this please go to Greenmedinfo.com everything there is linked to studies that back all this up.

I really wouldn't depend on Sayer Ji for reliable information. His ignorant mangling of science - he claims that the use of human cell lines for producing vaccines is cannibalism, for example.

PS I just had a son 2 weeks ago and there is no way he is getting vaccinated no way Breast milk,probiotics, Vit D3 and Vit c will support him. Take your needles and chemicals and side effects and shove it.

How will any of these things protect him against pertussis or meningitis? Were you vaccinated against pertussis during your pregnancy? If not it's unlikely your breast milk will contain enough antibodies to protect him. I sincerely hope you don't have to watch your son go through pertussis (as I have - weeks in the hospital, not fun for him or us) or worse, as a result of gambling with your son's life like this.

The truth is that the best nutrition in the world won't protect you from a contagious disease, if you lack immunity from vaccination and haven't had it before. That's not to say nutrition isn't important, but it just isn't true that it can prevent all diseases.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

^ I mean to say Sayer Ji's ignorant mangling of science is legendary.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

Krebiozen: "Native Americans lived a healthy lifestyle, ate organic food, breathed clean air, got plenty of exercise and drank unpolluted water. Their immune systems must have been highly robust. Yet when they were exposed to European viruses they died in their thousands."

It was more like millions. It is estimated that 90% of the native peoples from all of the Americas died from the results of diseases. It was not just the diseases, much of it was because the adults who provided for the young could not get food, and many died. Entire civilizations were wiped out.

iliya should read both 1491 and 1493 by Charles Mann. It includes quotes from European explorers who would return to a native town after just a few year and find it gone. There were also changes in the ecosystems when the whole populations disappeared (like forests returning since they were no longer being cultivated).

By the way, smallpox may have made it from the Atlantic to the Pacific in North America faster than the Europeans. The European explorers noticed smallpox scars on the native population when the first entered the inland waters of British Columbia and Washington state (though other theories think it may have been the Russian and/or Spanish). Even Lewis and Clark encountered native American smallpox victims on the journey. See: Smallpox epidemic ravages Native Americans on the northwest coast of North America in the 1770s.

On a slightly lighter note, last year I read a wonderful book about a Russian who wanted to colonize North America. The title should give you a hint: Glorious Misadventures: Nikolai Rezanov and the Dream of a Russian America. The author was the son of a British diplomat who married a woman he met in Russia. Since he grew up partially in Russia, he throws in some jabs on how the Czar's court created policies that still exist today in Russia.

iliya, what kind of dressing do you want on your word salad?

Paragraph breaks would be nice. Also, attribution of copy-pasted material.

We dont need specific antibodies to every little disease. Flawed science. We need a STRONG HOST or overall general immune system

Yet Evolution has endowed you with mechanisms which generate specific antibodies. Who to believe, iliya or umpteen million years of evolution? It is a mystery!

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

Chris,
Excellent reading recommendations, as always, thanks.

It was more like millions. It is estimated that 90% of the native peoples from all of the Americas died from the results of diseases. It was not just the diseases, much of it was because the adults who provided for the young could not get food, and many died. Entire civilizations were wiped out.

It's hard to distinguish healthy people who died directly as a result of those diseases from those who died indirectly from infrastructural collapse or due to general abuse by Europeans during that period.

I was interested to read a Wikipedia article suggesting that the New World population may have been much larger than previously thought. Diseases, moving faster then the immigrants as you observed, had already wiped out many people before Europeans got to where they lived, so they assumed the population was always that small. I know that large areas of the Brazilian rain forest were clearly cultivated centuries ago.

Whatever way you look at it, this seems to me to be good evidence that the claim that a well-nourished healthy person will not contract and suffer serious sequelae from contagious diseases is false. It would be lovely if we could make ourselves and our children immune to illness through diet and lifestyle, but it's a fantasy. Sadly some people put their children's health and lives at risk because they are so invested in this wishful thinking.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

@ Chris:

Right. There are quite a few places in and around SF that are called 'Russian' - a hill, a river. And the remains of a fort north of the river. There's a place called Sebastopol but I don't think it was directly named by Russians.
(Pareidolius would know- I remember a tale about a big fight which became compared to a battle in Russia)
There are also some new Russian immigrants in the city.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

It is a great read and does discuss the California connection.

The main character of that book did make it down to San Francisco, and (I think) marry the Spanish governor's daughter. The Russian established a small presence to grow crops for their colony in Alaska.

Right. There are quite a few places in and around SF that are called ‘Russian’

More importantly, there always seems to be at least one tap in the Toronado serving IPA from the Russian River brewery.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

I am not going to spoon feed you all the information and citations. Thats for you to spend time doing. Greenmedinfo has lots of links to the side effects of vaccines by reputable scientists on PUBMED. Here is a letter from a poor mother who links several studies to her blog. http://www.regardingcaroline.com/pubmed

if you spend any time at all its Crystal clear Vaccines are potentially very dangerous and do long term damage.
I will say this one more time. Myself and all other anti-vaxxers have NO MOTIVE to think the way we do. We have arrived at this conclusion based on facts and common sense. Most Chiropractors do not vaccinate either. Are they Quacks too? of course they are to you people. Actually you could learn a lot by visiting with a Chiro. I highly recommend it. The real Quacks are MD's who do not understand or are trained in nutrition science. They are clueless to the benefits of high dose VIT C. and many other modalities like OMEGEA 3 Fatty acids and how incredibly important they are to the human body especially a pregnant women. They are Just clueless. And you want ME? to trust these doctors with my son? OH HELL NO. Maybe when they go back to school and learn about Epi Genetics and the all the latest scientific breakthroughs in Nutrition will I have any faith that they can get me well. If I am in a car accident or lost a leg or have a serious infection and need anti-biotics they are qualified.

All they know is DRUGS and Surgery. Best of luck getting well with an MD. You will be on a bunch of pharmaceuticals that cover the symptom and dont dress the root cause. They are only good for EMERGENCIES or ACUTE illness. Thats it. If you a have digestive problems, obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, depression Go see a Naturopathic doctor or a Chiropractor and watch how quickly your body heals itself when given the proper building blocks of life NUTRITION! DUH

Lets just say vaccines eradicated all these disease like you believe and they are the greatest life saving medical procedure man has ever known. Explain this?

An epidemic of chronic disease and disability is plaguing America’s children, who are the most highly vaccinated children in the world and also among the most chronically ill and disabled. Today, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) states that 1 child in 6 in America suffers with learning disabilities while millions more suffer with asthma, diabetes and other chronic allergic and autoimmune diseases. The epidemic of chronic disease and disability among children has increased dramatically in the past five decades.

So great we dont have chickenpox but we have autism
No more diptheria but we have Asthma
No more tetanus but we have Type 1 diabetes
No more pertussis but we have ADHD

When you ask Doctors what is causing this they say its most likely environmental causes. But they are 100% sure its not vaccines. Yeah right!!!! We are sure its not the aluminum sulphate or mercury.....If you believe that your a fool...

The likely answer is. in fact Vaccines, GMO's which include Glyphosphate along with a poor diet.

As for the native indians I have not researched that so no comment

Also if your only source of information is Webmd ,Mayo clinic, CNN, CDC, AMA your digging in the WRONG places. They are all biased to protect the medical establishment. They are always making people question vitamins creating doubt. Its simply false.

Here are 2 movies for everyone to watch. Well done and hard to refute.

http://www.greatergoodmovie.org

http://www.boughtmovie.com

Take the time and ask yourself

What if Vaccines are bad and we don't need them?
Why are Anit Vaxxers so sure of themselves?
Why are kids so sick?

Answer those questions and you will know why

I am not going to spoon feed you all the information and citations. Thats for you to spend time doing

Yep, *that's* going to change people's minds!
I begin to suspect that Iliya does not really come here for the hunting to convince people.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

iliya: "I am not going to spoon feed you all the information and citations."

So you have exactly nothing, because that is a classic claim of those who refuse to provide citations.

"if you spend any time at all its Crystal clear Vaccines are potentially very dangerous and do long term damage."

Except we have spent time with the science, and it is crystal clear that they are much safer than the diseases.

"We have arrived at this conclusion based on facts and common sense."

Prove it. Provide the PubMed indexed citations by reputable qualifed researchers.

"Today, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) states that 1 child in 6 in America suffers with learning disabilities while millions more suffer with asthma, diabetes and other chronic allergic and autoimmune diseases."

First learn what a standard deviation means, and why the 16% (about 1 in 6) is an important ratio.

"The epidemic of chronic disease and disability among children has increased dramatically in the past five decades."

Citations needed, from real researchers.

"As for the native indians I have not researched that so no comment"

We noticed.

"What if Vaccines are bad and we don’t need them?"

Vaccine Safety: Examine the Evidence

"Why are Anit Vaxxers so sure of themselves?"

Dunning/Kruger Syndrome.

"Why are kids so sick?"

By what standard? You need to provide those statistics from verifiable sources.

hdb: "I begin to suspect that Iliya does not really come here for the hunting to convince people."

Well, she is certainly proving how bereft she is of common sense and intellectual acumen.

@ herr doctor bimler:

All sorts of interesting business occurs near the Russian River - esp at the Bohemian Grove.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

@ Chris:

It's a great area that I know very well although I've never actually lived there.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

I actually lived in the Monterey Bay area as a child (it was, in fact, the longest I lived in one area until I went to college... being the nomadic Army brat). I got to visit San Francisco a few times, and we camped in nearby areas. We often went Carmel and Big Sur.

I played in the Dennis the Menace Park, and actually met the young man it was based on when my father and another Army officer shanghaied him from the airport. That Dennis was a young Army recruit and he could not refuse the demands of two Majors to have a drink and meet their kids. I was disappointed to find out that he had grown up and was not impressed (I was eight years old). Now, in recent years I have looked him up on the Googles and feel very sad about him and his relationship with his father. I am sure the shenanigans of my father and his friend did not help.

But I saw Cannery Row, and did go a field trip to Doc's laboratory where I remember seeing a large squid in a jar. Years later on a visit to the aquarium I saw that same squid on display there.

While my dad was Vietnam we lived in Pacific Grove, and I as part of David Ave. Elementary School participated in the parade for the Monarch Butterflies. It was a school where deer wandered into the playground. Our house in Ft. Ord had a view of the bay. I loved that place.

But by the time I grew up, it changed and there was so much change. There is no way we could find a job and live there in the 1980s. Le sigh.

Hubby and I plan to spend our 35th Anniversary in San Francisco and the Napa Valley.

Dammit, I missed all the fun when you guys did a take down of iliya's posts.

Look at this link that iliya provided as "proof". Scroll down to see how Caroline's mother subjected her to bogus treatments for bogus diagnoses prescribed by quack practitioners including Dr. Charles (Chuck) Dumont:

http://www.regardingcaroline.com/history.html

By the way I am a grown man and father not a women. And a bonafide leader in business and no pushover.

Chris Many of the precious studies you cite are done by the drug companies themselves. we need independence.

Why hasn't the National Institute of health conducted a study of vaccinated VS unvaccinated kids? The anti vaxxers have been asking for this yet none have been done. WHY? Just think about that. there must be a reason. Are they scared by what they might find? You better believe it. I hear the reason is because its immoral because it would risk to many children. Really? I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research. and I am sure there will be no shortage of people to study.

The real reason is it would expose the business of Vaccinating as a fraud. and bring down the entire medical establishment. and call into question 100 years of allopathic medicine. Revolution

We could put this to rest in 5 years with that study.

I tell you what lets look at each fact and then decide.

Study # 1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
J Biomed Sci. 2002 Jul-Aug;9(4):359-64.
Abnormal measles-mumps-rubella antibodies and CNS autoimmunity in children with autism.
Singh VK1, Lin SX, Newell E, Nelson C.
Author information
Abstract
Autoimmunity to the central nervous system (CNS), especially to myelin basic protein (MBP), may play a causal role in autism, a neurodevelopmental disorder. Because many autistic children harbor elevated levels of measles antibodies, we conducted a serological study of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and MBP autoantibodies. Using serum samples of 125 autistic children and 92 control children, antibodies were assayed by ELISA or immunoblotting methods. ELISA analysis showed a significant increase in the level of MMR antibodies in autistic children. Immunoblotting analysis revealed the presence of an unusual MMR antibody in 75 of 125 (60%) autistic sera but not in control sera. This antibody specifically detected a protein of 73-75 kD of MMR. This protein band, as analyzed with monoclonal antibodies, was immunopositive for measles hemagglutinin (HA) protein but not for measles nucleoprotein and rubella or mumps viral proteins. Thus the MMR antibody in autistic sera detected measles HA protein, which is unique to the measles subunit of the vaccine. Furthermore, over 90% of MMR antibody-positive autistic sera were also positive for MBP autoantibodies, suggesting a strong association between MMR and CNS autoimmunity in autism. Stemming from this evidence, we suggest that an inappropriate antibody response to MMR, specifically the measles component thereof, might be related to pathogenesis of autism.

Study #2
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250

Study # 3
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2025848/#reference-sec

Damages case
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html

Latest news from this year.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/lawrence-solomon/merck-whistleblowers_b_58…

Why would you trust pharmaceutical companies anyway? foolish

illya:

As has been explained here many a time, there has not been and will not be that sort of vaccinated-versus-unvaccinated study because it would be horribly unethical.

Think about it: if you agree that vaccination is a life-saving intervention, you cannot ethically run a study that denies that protection to large numbers of children. Conversely, if you disagree and think it's harmful, you cannot ethically run a study that involves vaccinating large numbers of children. Also, almost nobody, regardless of their opinions about vaccination, would be willing to enroll their child in a double-blinded study such that neither the children, their parents, nor their pediatricians would know whether any given child had been vaccinated.

Vicki, did you happen to open the links to the papers iliya provided?

Total hogwash from a 56 year old paper published in the BMJ about regression after the administration of DTP vaccine, some dreck published in Medical Hypotheses...and two links to the Ho-Po.

The first Ho-Po article is written by crank David Kirby and describes two awards for encephalitis supposedly caused by the MMR vaccine, covered here by Orac:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/01/15/david-kirbys-back-and-this…

The second link on the Ho-Po is crank Lawrence Solomon's article about "Whistleblowers":

- The two ex-Merck employees who are alleging that Merck changed laboratory test results for the MMR vaccine to the FDA. Has that case been adjudicated yet, iliya?

- Brian Hooker's bogus analysis of the 2004 DeStefano et al study, which has been fully retracted by the publisher and reported by Orac, here:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/10/06/its-official-brian-hookers…

I am a grown man and father not a women. And a bonafide leader in business and no pushover.

On the Intertubes we are all Marie of Roumania.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

Study #2
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250

The first word of the title begins -- "Hypothesis:" -- signals the nature of the paper clearly enough, not to mention its publication in a journal called "Medical Hypotheses"; but Iliya still insists on calling it a "Study". OK.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 06 Jan 2015 #permalink

not to mention its publication in a journal called “Medical Hypotheses”

I have little doubt that someone has already noted this, but – given that PMID 21993250 is presumably on the correct side of the "OK, peer review" horizon – I'm amused that Bruce Charlton had a blog.

By the way I am a grown man and father not a women. And a bonafide leader in business and no pushover.

Oh, fer Chrissakes, you think MLM for AdvoCare gets you into the Rotary Club?

Re: Greenmedinfo

You don't care about quality, do you? Greenmedinfo? Cesspool of BS.

Regarding this citation
According to the pasteur institute in France 98% of immune responses triggered at the early stages of infection are non specific. ,
being french I found it : http://www.pasteur.fr/recherche/unites/tcruzi/minoprio/French_press.html
It's a press release about these articles :
"A B-cell mitogen from a pathogenic trypanosome is a novel eukaryotic proline racemase"
Nature Medicine, 1er août 2000

Bernardo Reina-San-Martin1, Wim Degrave1,2, Catherine Rougeot, Alain Cosson, Nathalie Chamond, Anabela Cordeiro-da-Silva, Mario Arala-Chaves, Antonio Coutinho and Paola Minoprio

"Lymphocyte Polyclonal Activation : A Pitfall for Vaccine Design against Infectious Agents"
Parasitology Today, vol 16, no.2, 2000
Bernardo Reina-San-Martin, Alain Cosson and Paola Minoprio

I admit however that I know too few about this field to make sense of what is argued about using these articles.

(For the record, I don't "trust" pharmaceutical companies.
Quite a few of my regular sources are people like Ben Goldacre (who criticizes equally Big Pharma and anti-vaxxers) or the independent (entirely paid by suscribers) french journal Prescrire, who is extremely critical of drug industry... but still mostly support vaccination.
I could also cite Philippe Even and Bernard Debré, who recently published a book, "Guide des 4000 médicaments utiles, inutiles ou dangereux" (Guide on 4000 useful / useless / dangerous drugs), but clearly stated their pro-vaccine stance.
Basically, don't assume that people in favor of vaccines aren't critical of the drug industry please.)

Oh, and...

Why hasn’t the National Institute of health [sic] conducted a study of vaccinated VS unvaccinated kids?

Please define your terms.

We could put this to rest in 5 years with that study.

See above. Pick one specific endpoint. State what measure of not-signal would fully and finally convince you that you've been full of beans all along.

There's not much point otherwise, now is there?

iliya,

Here are 2 movies for everyone to watch. Well done and hard to refute.

At least two people have taken the trouble to watch these movies and refute them in detail.
'The Greater Good' has been reviewed here by a doctor well known to this blog, who describes it as "Pure, unadulterated anti-vaccine propaganda masquerading as a 'balanced' documentary".

The movie is based on three cases of supposed vaccine damage:

1. Gabi Swank who suffered neurological problems which are blamed on Gardasil even though her symptoms started weeks after being vaccinated. There seems to be no reason for anyone to think Gardasil had anything to do with her problems, given the safety studies and post-marketing surveillance of Gardasil that has found no sign that it causes any serious adverse events.

2. Jordan King, whose autism parents claimed was caused by vaccines, but the Vaccine Court disagreed, with the Grand Master stating: "I find that it is extremely unlikely that Jordan’s autism was in any way causally connected to his thimerosal-containing vaccines".

3. Victoria Grace Boyd Christner, who died tragically at the age of five months. Again there is no reason to link her illness and death to vaccination. There is no doubt at all that vaccines have dramatically reduced the number of children who die like this, so using this child as an example of the damage vaccines do is extremely dishonest.

'Bought' has also been reviewed, here, by James Cooper who has a Ph.D in chemistry and who describes the movie as "tedious nonsense", "Full of appalling misinformation".

I find it distressing that anyone is taken in by this kind of dangerous nonsense to the extent that they can write, " I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research. and I am sure there will be no shortage of people to study".

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 07 Jan 2015 #permalink

May I ask? Do any of you take a multi vitamin, Omega 3, Vit C, Vit D3, Probiotics, antioxidants ETC or are you on a supplement program for you personal health? Do you believe in vitamins or are they a waste of money?

I need to know this from all of you because it will clarify things for me. We all want the same thing healthy kids and adults. We just think Vaccines are another form of a drug. We think the innate immune system nutritionally supported is the optimal way to raise a baby to live in this world. <-----thats crazy?

Do the study of vaccinated VS unvaccinated already. It is the ONLY way to know for sure. There is no excuse for this and any reason not to is bullshit and you know it. Vikki your reasons are flimsy like overcooked spaghetti . All you would have to do is contact Barbara Loe Fisher and she could supply 1000's of un vaccinated children and Newborns to test each child and go over there medical records over the last 10 years. You could do an advertisement in a chiropractic or naturopathic newspaper and get all sorts of data from unvaccinated children. the supply of infants is abundant. This is actually an easy study to do. And those of us who know the truth and are not frightened would gladly supply our children in the name of science. And we would be vindicated and the lives of our future children would be saved from this 200 year mistake of vaccinating and its long term permanent side effects. In its place we could implement sound nutrition strategies for long term baby wellness. and get away from Allopathic medicine and its poison.

There has never been a long term safety study on the current vaccine schedule. Can any of you cite one? I would love to know what these cluster bombs of chemicals are doing? Oh yeah we already know this. We have the sickest generation of children ever, But its definitely not the vaccines. SMH

Have any of you actually looked at the ingredients in vaccines? My god its terrifying.
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipi…

Lets be clear this is injected directly into the muscle of babies who are still not fully developed. Its not ingested so its metabolised completely different. What could possibly go wrong? Answer When you overstimulate a precious little immune system with an array of chemicals its not unreasonable to think you are hyper sensitizing the immune system and that it may malfunction and cause auto immunity. THINK THINK THINK . Its common sense use your intuition you dont need a study to connect the dots. but in case you do not trust yourself

HERE is your citation

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/new-autoimmunity-syndrome-linked-alumi…

#cdcwhistleblower Start following that story its explosive but will likely be settled and swept under the rug to once again protect the medical establishment.

If vaccines are so safe and effective why can't we SUE the vaccine makers? Did any of you know that?

In 1986 the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act [14] was passed in response to a large number of lawsuits filed claiming vaccines were causing adverse reactions including brain damage and death. [15] The Act shielded medical professionals and vaccine manufacturers from liability if an individual suffered injury from receiving vaccines. The Act mandated that vaccine injury claims be filed with the US Court of Federal Claims rather than filed directly against physicians or vaccine manufacturers in civil court. Unlike civil court, people filing injury claims are not required to prove negligence or failure to warn; they only need to prove that a vaccine caused injury. [16] On Oct. 1, 1988, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) was created under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. [17] The VICP was "established to ensure an adequate supply of vaccines, stabilize vaccine costs, and establish and maintain an accessible and efficient forum for individuals found to be injured by certain vaccines." [17] Between 1989 and July 1, 2014, 3,645 compensation awards have been made (amounting to over $2.7 billion in awards and $113.2 million to cover legal costs) and 9,786 claims have been dismissed (amounting to $62.8 million paid to 4,925 dismissed claimants to cover legal costs). [17]

In the end we all have to decide who we are going to trust don't we? Prior to my son being born I already knew the TRUTH about nutrition and was skeptical of the medical establishment and its drugs. Fast forward 15 years and here we go all over again with vaccines and children. This has been the easiest TAKE DOWN I have ever done. But it starts with a fundamental truth nutrition cures!!!!! if you dont believe that your LOST and susceptible to Drugs vaccines and surgery. Thats fucking sad and your being LIED TO

Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free

@Iliya

On the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study, read this four-part series of posts that begins here. Then come back and explain how the study could be done, how it could be done ethically, and how it could be done legally.

On suing manufacturers, these links may be of interest: here and here.

As for ingredients, there are a couple posts here that may be of interest. The truth will set you free (from the fear in which you live).

Prior to my son being born I already knew the TRUTH about nutrition and was skeptical of the medical establishment and its drugs.

Ah, so you admit that you were already convinced of the evils of the medical establishment and seek out information to confirm that bias, rather than questioning your beliefs.

iliya: "Chris Many of the precious studies you cite are done by the drug companies themselves. we need independence"

Prove it. Go through each one of those studies and tell us exactly which drug company paid for with direct quotes from the papers' conflict of interest statements.

Do any of you take a multi vitamin, Omega 3, Vit C, Vit D3, Probiotics, antioxidants ETC or are you on a supplement program for you personal health? Do you believe in vitamins or are they a waste of money?

We're not your friggin' MLM suckers, iliya.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 07 Jan 2015 #permalink

Chris Do you take any vitamins at all? or are they a waste of money to you? Please answer that. Everyone needs answer that. As for the studies you posted its well known many of them are drug co funded and the article I posted regarding Merck PROVES they manipulate data for there own benefit.

Yes I am biased against the medical establishment because I know the damn truth its not an opinion Todd. Facts are facts.

75% of all diseases are caused by lifestyle choices lack of exercise, poor diet, etc and the answer to heal those diereses are not found in Drugs? DUH

We are not sick because of bad lick bad genes or bad germs. we are sick because of BAD choices. <-----TRUTH
Epigenetics Proves that.

So yes I am biased with the truth

Do vaccines cause injury? The answer according to Vaers
https://vaers.hhs.gov/index is YES.

Did nearly $3 billion get paid to victims of vaccines? the answer is YES.

1 example
damages Case
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html

Do drug companies manipulate data? the answer is YES
http://www.webmd.com/arthritis/news/20080415/study-vioxx-details-manipu…

Those are facts folks.

Unethical is the best answer you can give to not do a Vaccinated VS unvaccinated study? My head is exploding at that LAME excuse! There is no shortage of volunteers to vaccinate and study. there is no shortage of volunteers to not vaccinate.and study. Its only unethical to pro vaxxers the rest of us want to know!!!!Thats a nice convenient excuse to parrot and tell yourself for never finding out the TRUTH. SMH

Congratulations your all delusional now.

Where there is SMOKE there is FIRE.

There is a plume of smoke around vaccines

@iliya:

I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research.

How brave and noble of you to volunteer to sacrifice someone else's health to satisfy your own curiosity.

By justthestats (not verified) on 07 Jan 2015 #permalink

@illya: also, why do you trust vitamins, omega 3s and antioxidants when they were discovered by the same medical research system you so distrust when it comes to vaccines?

By justthestats (not verified) on 07 Jan 2015 #permalink

All you would have to do is contact Barbara Loe Fisher and she could supply 1000's of un vaccinated children and Newborns to test each child and go over there medical records over the last 10 years.

Oh, she could, could she? How many thousands? What gives you this idea in the first place? What good would "un vaccinated ... Newborns" be?

You don't seem to be thinking very carefully. Go answer the questions here.

^ For going over "there medical records over the last 10 years," that is. Perhaps you haven't even gotten to the point of figuring out what the possible designs are.

All you would have to do is contact Barbara Loe Fisher and she could supply 1000’s of un vaccinated children and Newborns to test each child and go over there medical records over the last 10 years.

I can't help wondering why Barbara Loe Fisher hasn't done the research herself, if she has all these thousands of unvaccinated children and their confidential medical records at her fingertips. Is it just laziness? Like iliya, she wants someone else to do the work?

What good would “un vaccinated … Newborns” be?
I would be more interested in cases of infants who were already vaccinated when born.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 07 Jan 2015 #permalink

@Iliya:

We are not sick because of bad lick bad genes or bad germs. we are sick because of BAD choices. <—–TRUTH
Epigenetics Proves that.

Do the DNA phosphorylation or the regulatory proteins do most of the proving? How do the little tiny molecules get their message to the humans?

By justthestats (not verified) on 07 Jan 2015 #permalink

Unethical is the best answer you can give to not do a Vaccinated VS unvaccinated study?

No. Now quit making an ass out of yourself by just repeating the same old shіt that everyone's heard before in mangled English and get back to this, as well as a study design.

Iliya: "As for the studies you posted its well known many of them are drug co funded and the article I posted regarding Merck PROVES they manipulate data for there own benefit."

Prove it. You are making a claim, yet you refuse to actually look at the papers. So which drug company funded Dr. Brent Taylor's studies that he did at the Royal Free when Wakefield refused to do followup? Do tell.

"The answer according to Vaers"

Really? What do you need to read before your enter the official VAERS portal? What are the words after "Please read the following statement on the limits of VAERS data. You MUST click on the box below to access the VAERS database."? Copy and paste them here, and then tell us what they mean in your own words.

"Do drug companies manipulate data? the answer is YES"

Why do you think Vioxx was a vaccine?

"Unethical is the best answer you can give to not do a Vaccinated VS unvaccinated study?"

Interesting how someone can demand a certain study design, but cannot be bothered to actually open up a paper on their computer and read it. Somehow he thinks we should accept without question that the studies in the list I provided were all funded by Merck. Or that a self-selected survey like VAERS is final data.

Iliya, why should we care about your opinion, when you don't even bother to put up relevant data and screw up the stuff you do post?

I will leave you folks to your beliefs and we can agree to disagree. But to suggest its unethical to a study of Vaccinated Vs Unvaccinated is ludacris. For any of you to actually believe that line of thinking with a clean conscious just shows me how far away from seeking the truth you really are and how warped your mind is. Thats pshyco-bable.

Its unethical for pediatricians to tell uninformed parents that Vaccines are perfectly safe and that the current schedule is safe. When there has NEVER EVER been a long term study done. EVER.

Its unethical to give infants the HEP B vaccine with out testing the mother for it. this vaccine given on the day of birth is the least justifiable of any vaccine. A child can ONLY get the disease from IV drug abuse, sexual activity with an infected partner, a blood transfusion using contaminated blood, OR from the mother.
The CDC states:
" … because errors or delays in documenting, testing, and reporting maternal HBsAg status can and do occur, administering the first dose of Hepatitis B vaccine soon after birth to all infants acts as a safety net, reducing the risk for perinatal infection when maternal HBsAg status is either unknown or incorrectly documented at delivery. Also, initiating the Hepatitis B vaccine series at birth has been shown to increase a child's likelihood of completing the vaccine series on schedule."
In other words, if you're pregnant and have tested negative for hepatitis B, it's advised that you vaccinate your baby anyway, just in case the test was wrong -- and because the CDC believes you're more likely to adhere to their dictated schedule if you start early, just hours after birth.

Flu Shot
Its unethical to force Nurses and health care workers to take a shot that even the Cochrane collaboration does not find effective and that its almost impossible to pick the EXACT strain for the new year. It is a heavily guarded secret within the medical establishment (especially within the corridors of the CDC) that the Cochrane Database Review (CDR), considered by many within the evidence-based medical model to be the gold standard for assessing the effectiveness of common medical interventions, does not lend unequivocal scientific support to the belief and/or propaganda that flu vaccines are safe and effective.
Citation
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20166073

I can go on and on and on and crush your flimsy arguments. At the end of the day you MUST start with a fundamental truth that you believe based on facts. For me its started with therapeutic optimal levels of nutrition in my blood for 90 days that transformed my health in unbelievable ways. Its backed by science. With that I am able to refute a lot of things like drugs that are unnecessary. If vitamins can replace drugs with no side effects and CURE the illness what does that tell me. It tells me there is an agenda to SQUASH the truth about vitamins. Therefore I cannot trust the medical establishment. Now the topic of vaccines comes up. I research and find out there is a lot misinformation being circulated. Which I have documented in all my postings. I find out The side effects are underreported and explained by coincidence? Conclusion Drugs are not necessary MOST of the time, only for emergencies & acute illness like infection and Vaccines are not necessary.

Thats my case and the evidence is OVERWHELMING unless of course you just can't believe Medical doctors and the establishment is wrong. Thats shocking to you isn't it? Sorry to break the news but yes there are people who make a lot of money on fools keeping them in the dark.

Its called Money and POWER and the early leaders Hijacked the POLIO vaccine data and manipulated the statistics and used it as the Triumph of medicine and leveraged every other vaccine after it and the MYTH still lives on and you have bought into it hook line and sinker. look him up Bernard Greenberg 1962

http://www.vaccination.co.uk/questions/q8.htm

Goodbye and get a clue already. This is too easy

"But to suggest its unethical to a study of Vaccinated Vs Unvaccinated is ludacris."

Tell that to those who enforce the Belmont Report. I am sure they would love to hear from you about the ethics of medical testing on children. Perhaps you should from a coalition to rewrite it.

"to the belief and/or propaganda that flu vaccines are safe and effective.
Citation"

So is your two week old child already a heath care worker and/or elderly? By the way, there are serious issues with one of the authors.

"At the end of the day you MUST start with a fundamental truth that you believe based on facts."

Which you have failed to provide. I am still waiting for you to prove that all of the studies in the list I gave were paid by drug companies.

"I research and find out there is a lot misinformation being circulated. Which I have documented in all my postings."

Not really. The Dunning/Kruger in you is very strong.

"MYTH still lives on and you have bought into it hook line and sinker. look him up Bernard Greenberg 1962"

And yet there is no similarity between polio and meningitis. Real doctors know that, but obviously the chiropractor who runs that website really does not have a clue. Plus he is also deliberately misrepresenting the legacy of Dr. Greenberg. You really ought be ashamed for falling for such nonsense.

Goodbye and get a clue already.

Do stick the flounce.

iliya: "I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research."

Bit of advice: Don't write anything you wouldn't want to hear repeated at a custody hearing.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 07 Jan 2015 #permalink

But to suggest its unethical to a study of Vaccinated Vs Unvaccinated is ludacris. For any of you to actually believe that line of thinking with a clean conscious just shows me how far away from seeking the truth you really are and how warped your mind is.

I will gladly sacrifce my son. for the research.

You seem a little confused. Ethical research does not involve sacrificing other people. Not even sacrificing them gladly.

By justthestats (not verified) on 08 Jan 2015 #permalink

If you do not discover for yourselves the POWER of NUTRITION and how its revolutionizing health care you will always be a slave to Drugs, vaccines and surgery kept in the dark right and CONFUSED. Precisely where they want you. Dont be a fool. The info is out there but you must have the right prism to see it. I have nothing more to say about any of this. you nitpick the minutia and thats not where the ideas are.

Please go seek the truth on nutrition, Epi Genetics and everything will fall into place. and you will finally GET IT. Like many defecting MD's as well as Chrios and Naturopaths. We are right and you are wrong and its all based on SCIENCE and irrefutable.

Goodbye and Godbless

I'm GOING to say a BUNCH of things in random CAPITAL LETTERS to show how IMPORTANT and SMART I am.....

@Iliya

We are not sick because of bad lick bad genes or bad germs. we are sick because of BAD choices. <—–TRUTH
Epigenetics Proves that.

Do show some evidence that "BAD" choices cause measles. Or congenital rubella syndrome. And I'm not talking about bad decisions like foregoing vaccination or asking a sick person to cough on you. Show that "BAD" choices, rather than measles/rubella viruses, cause those illnesses.

Iliya: in Hawaii most of the locals ate healthy food and got plenty of exercise. They were nearly driven to extinction by measles. Why was that?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 08 Jan 2015 #permalink

@Gray Falcon

Undoubtedly because they made the "BAD" choice of allowing Europeans to introduce them to the evils of "Western" medicine.

We are right and you are wrong and its all based on SCIENCE and irrefutable.

Argumentam ad two-year-old.

Please go seek the truth on nutrition

The truth on nutrition: there are certain things that your body needs you to ingest. Got it.

Epi Genetics

The truth on Epi Genetics: DNA transcription gets regulated instead of every cell expressing every gene the exact same amount. Got it.

Oh, by the way, it's spelled "epigenetics."

and everything will fall into place. and you will finally GET IT.

Nope, I'm really not seeing how some basic biology stuff is going to suddenly wipe out everything that we know about the human body.

We are right and you are wrong and its all based on SCIENCE

Don't you get it? Drugs, surgery, and vaccines are also based on the exact same SCIENCE, which says that nutrition is important but nutrition + the appropriate use of drugs, surgery, and vaccines is significantly better.

and irrefutable.

Well now, that's where you lose the SCIENCE. Science prefers "not yet refuted," or more accurately "we haven't found the flaws in this yet, but there's probably a better model that makes slightly different, more accurate predictions."

BTW, you still haven't explained why you think that human sacrifice is ethical. Do you tell people that before you agree to watch their kids?

By justthestats (not verified) on 08 Jan 2015 #permalink

iliya,

If you do not discover for yourselves the POWER of NUTRITION and how its revolutionizing health care you will always be a slave to Drugs, vaccines and surgery kept in the dark right and CONFUSED.

What is so different in what diet you recommend and that recommended by my doctor? I'm in the UK and this is what my government tells me I should eat to be healthy. I believe the US recommendations are broadly similar. What is wrong with this, and what evidence do you have for claiming that it is wrong?

If nutrition is so powerful, why don't we see a larger effect on health? Three large studies in the UK found no significant effects of diet on mortality, and the EPIC study which has followed more than half a million people for 15 years, has also found surprisingly little correlation between diet and health.

Another recent study looking at the problem from the other end (as it were) has found that about two thirds of the mutations that lead to cancer are not due to environmental factors or inherited predispositions. These studies suggest that diet, which is an environmental factor, has little effect on cancer, sadly.

It seems to me you are a True Believer trying to proselytize what looks more like a religion than a science-based approach to nutrition. I know it would be nice to have some sure-fire way of warding off scary diseases, but the evidence tells us that vaccines work far, far better than diet, unless a person is clinically malnourished, which is fairly unusual in the developed world.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 08 Jan 2015 #permalink

Huh. I didn't know that vitamins and such could cure my genetics. And I want to know why the vitamins and calcium *recommended by my doctor* haven't cured all my ailments. (Due to surgery I am not always able to eat sufficient amounts of foods for good nutrition so my MD recommends vitamins and CA). BUT - I still have labile hypertension (thank you genetics).

I also don't waste my time and money on mega-doses, but take what my MD recommends. No MLM for me, either.

And I am up to date on my vaccines, my children are up-to-date on theirs, and I still wish the chickenpox vaccine had been available before they got it. I image iliya would just love to give HIS kids narcotics like I had to give mine to keep them from being so miserable they couldn't eat, drink or sleep.

ludacris . ..a clean conscious ... pshyco-bable.

It is easy to tell when Iliya is copy-pasting spam, as in comments 170 and 187... he suddenly turns literate.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 08 Jan 2015 #permalink

We need vaccines for what reason?

To safely and effectively reduce the incidence of infectious diseases in the population--I thought that was obvious. For example, prior to the varicella vaccine being licensed in 1995, in the US there were roughly 4 million cases of chicken pox every year (mostly in children below the age of 11), resulting in about 13,000 hospitalizations and 100 to 150 deaths.

From the prevaccination period to 2002, by contrast, hospitalizations due to chicken pox declined by 88 percent and ambulatory visits declined by 59 percent (resulting, BTW, in a decline in estimated direct medical expenditures for chicken pox hospitalizations and ambulatory visits from an average of $84.9 million in 1994 and 1995 to $22.1 million in 2002 (that's 74%).

(see PMID:16106004)

But to suggest its unethical to a study of Vaccinated Vs Unvaccinated is ludacris.

No, it's accurate. First, while unvaxed versus vaxed studies may be (and are) ethically performed to evaluate vaccines for previously unaddressed infectious diseases, a prospective vaxed versus unvaxxed study to examine vacines already approved for usage would require investigators leave the unvaccinated cohort vulnerable to serious illness, injury and death by those infectious diseases. Fortunately, it isn't necessary to conduct such a studies, as retrospective studies can serve in their stead--and multipel such large, retrospective epidemiological studies, by mulitple independent researchers and public health agencies in multiple nations, have been conducted (See, madsen, DeStefano, Hviid, etc.).

Its unethical for pediatricians to tell uninformed parents that Vaccines are perfectly safe and that the current schedule is safe.

Which no one is actually telling parents, are they? Instead all taht';s being claimed--and accurately--is that the risks associated with routine childhood vaccination have been both well characterized and found to be orders of magnitude lower the the risks associated with remaining vulnerable to nfection by the diseases they protect against.

Its unethical to give infants the HEP B vaccine with out testing the mother for it. A child can ONLY get the disease from IV drug abuse, sexual activity with an infected partner, a blood transfusion using contaminated blood, OR from the mother.

I'm sorry, but this quite simply isn't true. See http://shotofprevention.com/2010/05/06/why-infants-should-receive-the-h…

Its unethical to force Nurses and health care workers to take a shot that even the Cochrane collaboration does not find effective and that its almost impossible to pick the EXACT strain for the new year.

Except they aren't being forced to take a shot, are they? It may be a condition of employment in many hospitals/medical centers, but that's hardly the same thing--is it? In fact, many hospitals allow those who wish to be exempt to elect instead wear additional PPE to protect their clients (a mask, for example) from infection.

For me its started with therapeutic optimal levels of nutrition in my blood for 90 days that transformed my health in unbelievable ways.

You're confusing a single personal anecdote with evidence.

Its backed by science.

Provide citations to that science, then. So far you've offered nothing but unsupported assertion this is the case.

The info is out there but you must have the right prism to see it.

"Info" that one must be in the right frame of mind to find compelling (i.e., that's only persuasive if viewed through the 'right prism') isn't evidence, but instead articles of faith.

We are not sick because of bad lick bad genes or bad germs. we are sick because of BAD choices. <—–TRUTH

As clearly you've been making good choices for a number of years, perhaps you'd be willing to innoculate yourself with a substantial bolus of gonnorhea or syphilis. and prove to us all that sickness is casued by bad choices rather than exposure germs? No?

Color me unsurprised...

@Iliya

Unethical is the best answer you can give to not do a Vaccinated VS unvaccinated study? My head is exploding at that LAME excuse! There is no shortage of volunteers to vaccinate and study. there is no shortage of volunteers to not vaccinate.and study.

You didn't bother reading the links I provided to you on a vaxed vs. unvaxed study, did you? The only way such a study would be ethical is if we had no clue whether vaccines were effective or ineffective or whether they were safe or harmful. But we do know.

Further, your suggestion that there are "no shortage of volunteers to vaccinate and study. there is no shortage of volunteers to not vaccinate.and study" illustrates that you do not understand how randomized trials work. If we let people willingly choose which group to be in (vaccinated or unvaccinated), then that introduces biases that would invalidate a prospective study's results.

Why don't you come back when you've read those links and learned a little more about study design.

The Madsen et al study of MMR safety, published in NEJM in Nov 2002, was vax/unvax.

By Brian Deer (not verified) on 12 Jan 2015 #permalink

That November 2002 Study which was pubished in the NEJM, authored by Madsen, et al, is available on PubMed (PubMed is your friend):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12421889

N Engl J Med. 2002 Nov 7;347(19):1477-82.

A population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism.

Madsen KM1, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, Olsen J, Melbye M.
Author information

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

It has been suggested that vaccination against measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) is a cause of autism.
METHODS:

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all children born in Denmark from January 1991 through December 1998. The cohort was selected on the basis of data from the Danish Civil Registration System, which assigns a unique identification number to every live-born infant and new resident in Denmark. MMR-vaccination status was obtained from the Danish National Board of Health. Information on the children's autism status was obtained from the Danish Psychiatric Central Register, which contains information on all diagnoses received by patients in psychiatric hospitals and outpatient clinics in Denmark. We obtained information on potential confounders from the Danish Medical Birth Registry, the National Hospital Registry, and Statistics Denmark.

RESULTS:

Of the 537,303 children in the cohort (representing 2,129,864 person-years), 440,655 (82.0 percent) had received the MMR vaccine. We identified 316 children with a diagnosis of autistic disorder and 422 with a diagnosis of other autistic-spectrum disorders. After adjustment for potential confounders, the relative risk of autistic disorder in the group of vaccinated children, as compared with the unvaccinated group, was 0.92 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.24), and the relative risk of another autistic-spectrum disorder was 0.83 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.65 to 1.07). There was no association between the age at the time of vaccination, the time since vaccination, or the date of vaccination and the development of autistic disorder.

CONCLUSIONS:

This study provides strong evidence against the hypothesis that MMR vaccination causes autism.

Copyright 2002 Massachusetts Medical Society

I want to share this with all of you so that you may have a different perspective on health. A holistic view point. Not the same Dogma we have been taught. Its the weekend and it will add value to your knowledge and perspective on how you see health. Its very powerful. Enjoy! its a gem

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wsinDsogpw&spfreload=10

So, iliya, you are a supplement shill.

So do tell us which supplements would have protected the over thirty people who caught measles by going to Disney.

So were the six home schooled siblings who showed up a clinic with measles under nourished? What is your sure fire proven method to prevent measles that does not require you live around those who are fully vaccinated?

iliya, do you really think we would really be swayed by a YouTube video from a chiropractor whose webpage is mainly an online store?

I want to share this with all of you so.... Enjoy! its a gem

No, these promises of yours were "gems":

I will leave you folks to your beliefs and we can agree to disagree.... Goodbye and get a clue already.

We are right and you are wrong and its all based on SCIENCE and irrefutable.
Goodbye and Godbless

Just watch the video

I had a soft spot for you folks . I figured this guy could help you see what the truth is.

iliya, just provide the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that support your claims. A video sales pitch by a chiropractor does not count.

The truth is that you are a supplement shill, and probably work for that chiropractic clinic.

Just watch the video

No, I simply don't waste my time with argumentum ab TuaFistula.*

* I think the pronoun's sound. And screw macrons.

and probably work for that chiropractic clinic

Wrong country, wrong latitude and longitude.

MLM scammers work for themselves.

"Wrong country, wrong latitude and longitude."

Doesn't matter. iliya probably doesn't know he is spamming for someone's company and not getting compensated. He is still trying to get us to link and buy!

Every single word he speaks in this video is the TRUTH!
Why can't you handle the truth! Because your stuck in your belief that Vaccines Drugs and Surgery are the solutions to long term wellness. You think science and Bitechnology is going to come up with some miracle drug or shot to solve all that ails you. When the reality is found in the food you eat and the choices you make. Why do you continue to bow down at the alter of conventional medicine and MD's. They are not trained in wellness only sickness.

Are we healthier now in 2015? FUCK NO!!! and its directly because of sheep that continue to think alternative modalities have no value. Chiros are quacks. Vitamins dont work, we sell snake oil. Traditional Chinese medicine which includes Herbs and have been around for 5000 years are considered pseudoscience? Really? for the love of god WAKE UP!!!!!

pseudoscience is pushing a flu vaccine with 23% efficacy.

I thought I would be nice and let this Doctor explain a different viewpoint and hopefully open your mind to a broader scope of health. There are multiple medical modalities in treating health not just Drugs vaccines and surgery. Not only is this video not selling anything nor am I. If you would like me to watch a video of yours I will gladly review it and give you feedback. I challenge any of you to refute just 1 point in this video. just 1 that you think is false. There are none. I will bet you cannot refute a single point this guy makes. Not 1

Think I am wrong read how clueless MD's are when it comes to diet and nutrition.

.http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/health/16chen.html?_r=0

Sorry, Iliya, but science is based on testing claims against reality that can be verified by different people in different countries.

That way you can find out what really works, not just what you think works. And the results of those tests are published in scientific (and medical) journals, not YouTube or the New York Times.

And traditional Chinese medicine is woefully short on proven results that it can successfully treat any non-self limiting disease.

But, you're welcome to provide the Pubmed index for a result that shows otherwise.

The argument from antiquity that you make basically amounts to an assertion that "we figured it out thousands of years ago and haven't bothered to try to make it better since then."

So would you please answer these questions?

What has been the single biggest improvement in TCM in the last 50 years?

What treatment method that is part of TCM has been abandoned or replaced because it was shown to be less effective or had more side effects than an alternative?

By squirrelelite (not verified) on 18 Jan 2015 #permalink

iliya, you forgot to respond to this query: "So do tell us which supplements would have protected the over thirty people who caught measles by going to Disney. "

Just to let you know, measles is not the same as influenza.

We are healthier than in the past. We live longer, very few people are paralyzed by polio, and it is no longer ordinary for women to die in childbirth.

iliya,

I want to share this with all of you so that you may have a different perspective on health.

I was curious so I started watching this, but I was put off by the very first thing Chestnut said: "We're getting sicker and sicker instead of healthier and healthier." This is one of the pillars of the so-called natural health movement, the idea that we are all being poisoned by our diets, by pollutants, by GMOs, by vaccines or whatever so we are all succumbing to chronic diseases and either dying younger or, when you point out this isn't true, that we live longer but in a state of ill health.

It isn't true. Not only has life expectancy been increasing in the developed world, quality-adjusted life expectancy has been increasing too, by about 2 years just between 1987 and 2008. Not only are people living longer, they are active for longer too.

I wonder if it is simply that people tend to experience more illness as they get older, and instead of seeing it as a sign of ageing, they see it as an overall trend.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 18 Jan 2015 #permalink