Holocaust

The annals of "I'm not antivaccine," part 25: We're not antivaccine, we just publish posts about stopping the "Vaccine Holocaust"

oracknows — Wed, 31 May 2017 04:00:05 +0000

The annals of "I'm not antivaccine," part 25: We're not antivaccine, we just publish posts about stopping the "Vaccine Holocaust"

As hard as it is to believe, it was over seven years ago that I started my Annals of "I'm not antivaccine" series. The idea was (and continues to be) to point out how the claim that many antivaccine activists proclaiming themselves to be "not antivaccine" but rather "vaccine safety advocates" is, depending on the specific antivaxer making it, a lie, a delusion, or perhaps both. I do that by simply highlighting bits of over-the-top rhetoric I see on antivaccine websites likening vaccines to all sorts of evil things, particularly the Holocaust. In the case of the very first entry in this series ever, I highlighted Kent Heckenlively's likening vaccines to dynamite. Other examples rapidly followed, such as Kathy Blanco declaring that vaccines have NO VALUE [sic] (a sentiment echoed by a commenter), antivaxers likening vaccines to rape and human trafficking, and fraught comparisons to the Oklahoma City Bombing and the Titanic. Of course, through it all, there have Holocaust and Nazi comparisons. Oh, there have been so many Holocaust and Nazi comparisons, more than I can count, ranging from invoking Josef Mengele, the infamous doctor at Auschwitz known for conducting horrific medical experiments on prisoners, to general invocations of the Holocaust as an appropriate metaphor for "vaccine-induced autism," to an antivaxer putting a no vaccine badge on herself and her child, likening it to the Yellow Star of David patches that Nazis forced Jews in Germany to wear.

I never realized back then that, seven years later, I'd be up to part 25 now, although, to be honest, I've exercised self-restraint. I could easily have done 100 parts to this series since 2010. I also never realized that Holocaust analogies would lose their power to shock, but damn if antivaxers haven't used them so much that they elicit a yawn from me these days (at least most of the time). That's not to say that it isn't worth discussing such analogies, particularly when doing so serves a purpose. This time around, over at the antivaccine crank blog, Age of Autism, where the bloggers routinely oh-so-piously deny that they are "antivaccine," a woman named Laura Hayes is providing me with just such a reason to discuss yet another vaccine/Holocaust analogy, because she goes beyond just ranting to advocating action for "vaccine safety activists in a post called A Dozen Things We Can Do RIGHT NOW to Help Stop the Vaccine Holocaust. (Ms. Hayes sure does appear to like her all caps.) You can read the full dozen for yourself; I'll just "cherry pick" a few of the ones that interest me the most. But first let's look at Ms. Hayes' rationale in her introduction:

Every single week, without fail, there are tragic, heartbreaking stories of how vaccines have decimated or ended more lives. These stories are unending, they just keep coming.

Yet, doctors and nurses, who have become some bizarre type of pre-programmed automatons, continue to vaccinate day in and day out, despite the evidence of harm in their patients. It is as though they are brain dead, the “Stepford Wives” of Big Pharma, incapable of connecting that which they are injecting to that which they are then seeing and treating in their patients. Instead of stopping, analyzing, and changing course, they blindly plow forward, wreaking unspeakable damage in the very ones they have taken an oath to not harm.

Every single doctor and nurse (and now pharmacist, too) who is presently vaccinating the health, well being, and life out of their patients needs to stop, read the vaccine package inserts word for word, and then read critical analyses of vaccines and their ingredients that have not been written by those profiting directly or indirectly from vaccines. There can be no more excuses for or tolerance of the medical malpractice of injecting highly toxic, havoc-wreaking vaccines into people, followed by an inexcusable and callous disregard for the fallout, and a refusal to immediately stop that which is causing harm.

Extra credit for invoking the title of Andrew Wakefield's book! Well, done! Excellent posterior smooching! Of course, there is no evidence for any of Ms. Hayes' assertions about vaccines, other than that doctors and nurses continue to vaccinate. The reason, of course, is because vaccines are one of the safest, most effective medical interventions ever conceived by the human mind and created by human hands. Of course, because we physicians don't buy into the pseudoscience and quackery that Hayes believes, to her, we must be "brain dead" or "Stepford Wives." Our excuse for refusing to stop is simple: Vaccines work and they are safe. They do not cause all the conditions that antivaxers attribute to them.

Hayes tells us that more and more people are asking, “What can we do to stop this vaccine insanity and medical tyranny?” Whether that's true or not, I have no idea. I'm sure some people are asking that, because some people believe that the moon landing never happened, that the Holocaust never happened, or that 9/11 was an inside job, and antivaccine activists easily scale the same eights of delusion as any of these conspiracy mongers. In any event, Hayes wants you—yes, you!—if you're an antivaxer to take action immediately. I laughed out loud at the first one:

1. STOP giving business to doctors who vaccinate. When medical help is needed, let’s give our business to doctors and healers who are not harming and killing their patients with vaccines.

I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth of pediatricians everywhere who practice science-based medicine! This is one thing they would like more than anything else. Their loss of business would be minimal, and they wouldn't have to waste untold hours explaining to yet another mother like Ms. Hayes that vaccines don't cause autism, aren't loaded with deadly "toxins," and are indeed effective and safe, with such explanations falling on deaf ears. I can hear pediatricians everywhere saying, "Please, Ms. Hayes, don't fling me in dat brier-patch!"

Another one of Hayes' suggestions later in the article is almost, but not quite, as hilarious:

Call your insurance company to request a list of doctors who don’t vaccinate (of course, don’t expect such a list to exist). For those who have a vaccine-injured child, or who have lost a child as a result of vaccines, or who have suffered vaccine injury themselves or in a loved one, frequenting a medical practice where vaccines are still administered is akin to having your public school assignment be one where you can hear children being beaten and abused in the next room, or simply having the knowledge that beatings and abuse are occurring somewhere on campus whether or not you can hear them. Being in such a place can trigger post traumatic stress symptoms, and we should not be forced to endure such an environment when seeking necessary medical care. If such a list does not yet exist, then request as a bare minimum a list of doctors who don’t require proof of vaccinations or that you vaccinate. Remind your insurance company that they are required to provide necessary medical care that is accessible. When doctors require proof of vaccinations or that you vaccinate, that makes necessary medical care inaccessible to those who do not want vaccinations. We need to demand that our insurance companies offer and cover that which they are required to provide, in addition to that which we, the paying customers, want, and which doesn’t destroy our health.

Hmmm. Not only is it a "Vaccine Holocaust" but to Ms. Hayes going to a medical practice where vaccines are still administered is akin to having your public school assignment be one where you can hear children being beaten and abused in the next room," something she can't endure and doesn't think that anyone else should have to endure either. But, no, AoA is not antivaccine. Perish the thought! It just routinely publishes pieces by a woman who thinks there is a "Vaccine Holocaust" and likens vaccines to beating children.

There's just a modicum of a grip on reality left in Ms. Hayes that she realizes that no insurance company is going to maintain a list of doctors who don't vaccinate or even a list of doctors who don't require proof of vaccination before accepting a child into their practice. Quite the contrary! Vaccination rates are considered a quality metric that is used in pay-for-performance programs. Can you guess why? Because preventing disease is better (and cheaper) than treating disease. Doctors might remain on insurance plans if they don't vaccinate (clearly, there are antivaccine-friendly doctors who do), but any insurance company that becomes aware of such a physician is not going to publicize it.

The next one is not so funny, and is basically what many would consider harassment:

2. If you have a vaccine-injured child, return with your child to the doctor’s office where the harm was inflicted (for those whose child was killed by vaccines, take a picture of your child, or of their tombstone). Write a 1-pager detailing your child’s story, make 10 copies, and pass them out to the parents in the waiting room. Introduce them to your vaccine-injured child, and let them know that they were injured right there at that office. Include in your 1-pager and conversations how the doctor responded to your child’s vaccine injury, including whether or not they acknowledged it, reported it, helped your child after, or changed their vaccination practices as a result. Include whether or not any type of informed consent took place, including whether or not the doctor reviewed each and every vaccine package insert with you prior to administering vaccines to your child, and whether or not your doctor offered alternatives to vaccinations, including the option of not vaccinating. If entering the office is too intimidating or traumatic for you, consider the option of talking with parents in the parking lot before they take their child in for their appointment, and/or going with another parent and their vaccine-injured child. *If you no longer live near the doctor’s office where your child’s vaccine assault happened, take your child and your story to any local pediatrician’s office where the abusive practice of vaccination is still taking place.

Great. So basically she's telling antivaxers to harass the patients of pediatricians, none of whom did her any harm, before getting to the pediatricians, none of whom did her any harm either, her delusion otherwise notwithstanding reality. This is the sort of thing that will not end well—for Hayes and anyone who tries to follow her example. Most likely the result will be the police being called to escort her off the premises. I also can't help but note her obsession with package inserts. Package inserts are legal CYA documents. They are not scientific documents. Manufacturers list every potential adverse event ever observed, whether there is a link to the vaccine or not.

In any case, bothering parents just bringing their children to the pediatrician and potentially exposing them to disease by bringing your likely undervaccinated child along (given that most antivaxers stop vaccinating once they become convinced that a vaccine caused their child's autism) to potentially expose them to disease is a profoundly self-centered strategy. Hayes isn't trying to educate other parents; she's drawing attention to herself. It's all about her and gaining attention for her "plight" and that of her child, which is why she also advocates going to pharmacies that administer vaccines to pester pharmacists about whether or not they read every line off the package insert when giving informed consent and then bother the store manager with the same questions, while spreading antivaccine misinformation.

A lot of Ms. Hayes's other ideas are in the same vein and only marginally less obnocious. For instance, she advocates printing up a bunch of cards with brief lists of websites and "resources" chock full of antivaccine misinformation on them to pass out to expectant mothers. She also suggests approaching pastors and boards of places of worship to try to win them over, making signs to display, and starting a private e-mail group for local antivaxers to use to strategize, all dashed with a little sprinkle of paranoia:

Vet members carefully, keeping a watchful eye out for “controlled opposition” looking to infiltrate. Gather addresses and phone numbers, too, in preparation for a time when electronic communications may no longer be advisable or possible.

Yes, because the government is definitely coming to force you to vaccinate, just like it's definitely going to take away your guns. Oh, wait. It hasn't, and it's not going to. In a flourish of drama, Ms. Hayes asks for the help of AoA readers in coming up with more ideas to stop this "Vaccine Holocaust." The results are predictable—and depressing.

First, there's joe, who can't resist injecting (if you'll excuse the term) a bit of misogyny as foul as those toxins antivaxers imagine to be in vaccines. It's so nasty as to be worth posting in its entirety to make my point (also in case AoA moderators get rid of it):

I have a friend who is a pediatric nurse practitioner. I'm convinced it's willful ignorance with her. She doesn't know about vaccine dangers because she doesn't WANT to know.

Look, most pediatric docters in the U.S. are women. Most pediatric nurse practitioners are women. Heck, most nurses, LPNs, and medical assistants are women. WOMEN ARE PROPAGATING THE VACCINE HOLOCAUST.

Sorry if that hurts. They don't have to participate in the holocaust. They should be nurturing. But they're killers. They are. They should find other work. But it's not going to happen.

People in the healthcare field are followers. Laura, I love your passion, but please take this into account. The world today is not even close to what it was 10 years ago. People have lost their minds.

I organized a VAXXED movie showing and NO ONE from the conventional healthcare field came. They're afraid and suspicious, and dismissive, and snide. They're not coming out of their comfort zone. Ain't happening.

These fascist women vaccine providers must be stopped. But they will not by themselves.

I know you're shocked. But, but, but...it CAN'T be women doing this!!! Oh yes it can, and is. Walk into ANY pediatricians office and look at the staff - women. Including the doctor behind it all. Female.

Of course, the "Tbought Leaders" are all female, too. Melinda Gates, anyone? Chelsea Clinton, anyone? Young Barbara Bush and her Global Healthcorps? Do you know what her organization does? Just guess.

I bet joe's a Trump supporter too.

Here's the one that really disturbed me, though, as it hits very close to home. Not quite my institution close to home, but my medical alma mater close to home, which is bad enough. A nurse rants:

I am very frustrated by this article, Here is why: I am the mother of a severely vaccine injured 21 year old boy and a nurse. I work at Michigan Medicine. I am not allowed to say anything at work except the company script to patients concerning vaccination. I have been disciplined for not following this script when asked questions about vaccine by patients. Patients ask me my opinion which I am not allowed to give per Michigan Medicine policy. When I did answer one of these questions honestly some patients turned me in to my boss. They assured me also that talk about my vaccine injured child even to co-workers will lead to more discipline ending in my termination. They told me that when asked about my son I must say he is fine or doing well. If I could quit I would.

She is also very much opposed to the flu vaccine:

I am allowed to avoid vaccine for flu IF I WEAR A YELLOW MASK at all times in the hospital. This mask does not filter tiny viral particles. It is utilized to co worse me and others to take the flu shot. I have A LOT of difficulty breathing while I wear this. I would work with a ball and chain around my ankle to avoid taking vaccine.

It's good to know that my medical alma mater is doing the right thing and not letting its employees spout antivaccine misinformation to parents or try to persuade them not to vaccinate. It's also good to know that Michigan is requiring its employees with direct patient care responsibilities to be vaccinated against the flu. It's not so good that it allows an nurse with what can only be described as radically antivaccine views to continue to work in a capacity where she deals with patients and vaccines. I actually feel sorry for this nurse in that she clearly has a hard life dealing with a special needs child who is no longer a child. It's also very sad to see how far down the rabbit hole she's gone, having taken her child to Dr. Jeff Bradstreet, who apparently administered 85 doses of IV chelation therapy, which clearly didn't work (because chelation therapy doesn't work for autism).

Ms. Hayes is, of course, totally sympathetic with the nurse's plight, but in the wrong way, as in supporting her antivaccine stand. Then a commenter named Linda1 misinterprets the Florence Nightingale pledge, which she invokes at the end of her comment:

I am truly sorry for all that you've gone through and for what you face at work every day. But what Laura says is right. A nursing license is not a permit to act unethically. In fact, it is a license to stand firm to protect patients and to deliver the best care and teaching, even if that means standing up to a morally bankrupt hospital system and loss of employment. Financial need is never an excuse for wrong doing. If your job tried to force you to compromise on the principles that you are legally and morally obligated to uphold according to your license, then you have no choice but to either seek another line of work or work somewhere else where you will be free to provide good care. If all healthcare workers refused to do harm, or to be silenced when patients are being deceived, the holocaust would end. The only reason why it continues is because people rationalize that they have no choice but to participate. But they do have a choice.

A nursing license also requires that the nurse practice her profession according to the accepted evidence-based standard of care. Frightening patients and parents out of vaccinating is not practicing according to that standard of care. In fact, one thing that drives me crazy about state licensing boards for healthcare physicians is that they do nothing about antivaccine physicians, and they do even less against antivaccine nurses, no matter how much they endanger the public. In any case, about the only thing Linda1 and I agree on is that this nurse should not be working where she is working, albeit for incredibly different reasons. I predict that whenever our nurse commenter either decides to leave her job or is fired from it she'll end up working for an alternative medicine practitioner or going into alternative medicine herself, perhaps naturopathy.

So, to recap. What we've learned from Ms. Hayes and AoA commenters is that there is a Vaccine Holocaust of autism and neurologic disorders that antivaxers need to do something about. Also, their resistance is like that of partisans in Nazi-occupied territories. (Never mind that I don't see any "vaccine safety advocates" being gunned down, and, no, I haven't forgotten Jeff Bradstreet, who killed himself as the FDA zeroed in on his quack clinic.) Most importantly, doctors and nurses who vaccinate are the perpetrators of this holocaust who could stop it if they would only speak up. They are thus collaborators who are risking their licenses and going against their Hippocratic Oaths or Florence Nightingale Oaths by pumping horrific toxins into their patients in the form of vaccines.

Tell me again how all this is "not antivaccine" and how AoA could be "not antivaccine" despite publishing dreck like this over and over again. I'm not getting it. After all, it's not as though Ms. Hayes doesn't have a copious history of rhetoric very much like this over the course of several years.

oracknows Wed, 05/31/2017 - 00:00

Tags

Antivaccine nonsense

complementary and alternative medicine

History

Holocaust

medicine

Pseudoscience

Quackery

Skepticism/Critical Thinking

complementary and alternative medicine

medicine

Categories

Medicine

My employer blocks AOA so I can't access the site from work. (The site is considered a possible security risk for viruses...LOL) Or I'd respond:

Dear Laura: Insurance companies like healthy people. They cost a lot less to care for. That means encouraging vaccines, diet, exercise, a good work/life balance (at least, where I work). They don't like quacks or CAM - though they unfortunately do cover chiropractic care and acupuncture.

When you can present *good* science based information, which is what most of our policies are based upon, we'll talk, OK?

Signed: A Nurse who is fully vaccinated, UTD, and all her family is also.

I cannot recall a single vaccine that's ever been endorsed by anyone writing at AoA. And if you point out to them the success of smallpox and polio vaccines, they will tell you that either smallpox and polio diagnoses are faked and/or these diseases have been eradicated/decreased via clean water and sanitation. They will also tell you that neither disease was anywhere near as dangerous to humans as they are.

The worst type of anti-vaccinationists are the ones who won't even own up to being anti-vaccine.

Well, start the countdown timer to see how long before those nimble minds at AoA hook their "Vaccine Holocaust" claims to a new German law requiring kindergartens to report the parents of any unvaccinated child--which then puts those parents on the hook for a $2,800 fine for not vaccinating their children.

Virus menticola is the virus that lives in the mind.

@Chris Hickie: yeah. After all, we all know that smallpox and chicken pox are the same thing, they just renamed smallpox. And polio is the same as AFP, just renamed. There can't be different causes for the diseases. AOA just KNOWS they are right and we are all wrong and viruses and bacteria are the same things.

Oh yeah. Smallpox isn't dangerous...after all, the death rate in NYC in 1947 (12 cases, 2 deaths) must have been related to the poor water and sanitation, or the people must have just not been healthy like their own special snowflakes. Due to the mass immunization campaign they did, the outbreak was stopped in its tracks quite quickly.

Right? (I know you know this, but those nimrods at AOA annoy me).

There are parts of the world where polio is still a problem. One of them is Pakistan, where the CIA team that found Osama bin Laden operated under the cover of a polio vaccination effort.

If these anti-vax types persuade enough people in the West to forego the polio vaccination, then eventually there will be another polio outbreak in the US when somebody who is susceptible brings it back from one of these areas. We have already seen this with measles and pertussis.

Sooner or later, this is going to end up in court. Restraining orders for people who harass the customers of legitimate pediatricians, backed up with contempt citations when (with this crowd it won't be if) somebody ignores the restraining order.

"I organized a VAXXED movie showing and NO ONE from the conventional healthcare field came. They’re afraid and suspicious, and dismissive, and snide. They’re not coming out of their comfort zone. Ain’t happening."

How does this square with the oft-repeated antivaxer assertion about how the Conventional Paradigm is ending and antivaxers have a list of a gazillion health care providers on their side?

Chris Hickie: "if you point out to (people at AoA) the success of smallpox and polio vaccines, they will tell you that either smallpox and polio diagnoses are faked and/or these diseases have been eradicated/decreased via clean water and sanitation. They will also tell you that neither disease was anywhere near as dangerous to humans as they are."

Somehow I doubt that AoAers will tell you they are more dangerous to humans than smallpox and polio were, but there's a grain of truth there. :)

March 9, 2017 USA: Highest Vaccination Rate in the World Has the Worst Health

(Paul Fassa) That “worst health” label includes a ranking of 34th in the world with infant mortality. In other words, the USA has the 34th worst infant survival with its highest rate of vaccinations. Some are directly from multiple vaccinations administered.

http://sitsshow.blogspot.com/2017/03/usa-highest-vaccination-rate-in-th…

Fuck you, you call us Holocaust deniers.

And vaccines are cancer.

For most of history, smallpox was a major killer, with a case fatality of 30% and higher (Variola major). Infant mortality approached 50%. Many smallpox survivors have permanent scars over large areas of their body, especially their faces. Some are left blind. Sometime during the 19th Century a new mutation (Variola minor) arose in the Caribbean with a case fatality of 1%. The outbreak in New York City was Variola minor (but even 2 deaths in 12 is not trivial); but a few instances of Variola major occurred in other parts of the country and, without vaccination, could easily have spread. As for “clean water and sanitation”, totally wrong as smallpox is a highly contagious AIRBORNE infection. The absolute cleanest water and sanitation would have no effect on its spread.

Smallpox and chickenpox are not the same thing!

Chickenpox: Chickenpox illness usually lasts about 5 to 7 days. The classic symptom of chickenpox is a rash that turns into itchy, fluid-filled blisters that eventually turn into scabs. The rash may first show up on the face, chest, and back then spread to the rest of the body, including inside the mouth, eyelids, or genital area. It usually takes about one week for all the blisters to become scabs. Serious complications from chickenpox include
•bacterial infections of the skin and soft tissues in children including Group A streptococcal infections
•pneumonia
•infection or inflammation of the brain (encephalitis, cerebellar ataxia)
•bleeding problems
•blood stream infections (sepsis)
•dehydration
Though rare, deaths have occurred.

Smallpox: The first symptoms include:
•High fever
•Head and body aches
•Sometimes vomiting
A rash starts as small red spots on the tongue and in the mouth. These spots change into sores that break open and spread large amounts of the virus into the mouth and throat. The person continues to have a fever. Once the sores in the mouth start breaking down, a rash appears on the skin, starting on the face and spreading to the arms and legs, and then to the hands and feet. Usually, it spreads to all parts of the body within 24 hours. As this rash appears, the fever begins to decline, and the person may start to feel better. By the fourth day, the skin sores fill with a thick, opaque fluid and often have a dent in the center. Once the skin sores fill with fluid, the fever may rise again and remain high until scabs form over the bumps. The sores become pustules (sharply raised, usually round and firm to the touch, like peas under the skin). After about 5 days, the pustules begin to form a crust and then scab. By the end of the second week after the rash appears, most of the sores have scabbed over. This stage lasts about 6 days. The scabs begin to fall off, leaving marks on the skin.

Even Variola minor has a much higher death rate than chicken pox. Chickenpox doesn’t leave permanent scars. The rash spreads in a different pattern and looks differently between the two. Anyone who did their own research, that is, simply looked up the two diseases rather than relying on websites such as Age of Autism would see the differences.

And one can find newspaper articles, etc. from the 18th Century describing the devastation of smallpox prior to vaccination.

How does this square with the oft-repeated antivaxer assertion about how the Conventional Paradigm is ending and antivaxers have a list of a gazillion health care providers on their side?

Any serious anti-vaxer is capable of believing six impossible things before breakfast.

I hear The Gnat buzzing about my mentioning Holocaust denial. One notes that I did not actually call antivaxers Holocaust deniers, although one could make the case that those using the offensive analogy between vaccines and the Holocaust are guilty of minimizing the Holocaust as a crime. I did mention that "some people believe that the moon landing never happened, that the Holocaust never happened, or that 9/11 was an inside job, and antivaccine activists easily scale the same eights of delusion as any of these conspiracy mongers." That's a different thing than calling antivaxers Holocaust deniers. Antivaxers use the same sort of techniques to distort, deny, and misrepresent science, history, and evidence that Holocaust deniers use, which are the same techniques to distort, deny, and misrepresent science, history, and evidence that 9/11 "Truthers," moon hoaxers, and climate change denialists use.

This is odd, given that The Gnat appears to be very much supportive of using the truly offensive analogy comparing vaccines and autism to the Holocaust.

@ David Gorski:

In a previous article written by Laura Hayes on AOA, she wrote: "Not one vaccine has ever been tested according to the scientific gold standard, that of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Yes, you read that correctly, not one."
http://www.ageofautism.com/2016/09/vaccines-elimination-mandatory.html

I submitted a comment describing the 1954-55 Salk Vaccine Trials where half, almost 800,000 kids were double-blinded randomized and gave links. I wrote I could supply links to dozens of double blinded randomized clinical trials of other vaccines. AOA did not post my comment! Not the first nor the last time they haven't posted a comment by me where I not only explained why were wrong; but gave links. What does this say about AOA?

So, if Hayes really believes what she writes, she obviously livings in NEVER NEVER LAND!

The "Gnat" continues his journey down the rabbit hole. His latest screed is just another rung down, guaranteeing that he'll be living in his parent's basement for the foreseeable future.

Oh, The Gnat's parents are rich enough that I'm sure he has a very large, comfy bedroom and office in their house.

@Orac-Anti-vaccine views can be part of an overall paranoid worldview, so I would expect that anti-vaxxers would be more likely to believe in other conspiracy theories.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/10/vaccine-denial-conspirac…

@Brian: Of course it has to be the vaccines, it can't have anything to do with the difficulty poor people (especially the ones in rural areas who can't afford cars) have in this country accessing health care, amirite?

Correlation does not imply causation. Figures can't lie, but liars can figure.

Don't worry, because we know that many of the Gnat's new "friends" are most certainly Holocaust Deniers as well.

@Joel Harrison-I've heard anti-vaxxers make the same claims about measles-i.e., that measles cases declined because of better sanitation-of course, measles is also spread through the air, so that claim is obviously false.

They will also try to claim that measles is "only dangerous in third-world countries", and try to claim that measles is not dangerous in previously healthy persons. Again, this is obviously false-anyone can get pneumonia, acute measles encephalitis, or the worst-SSPE-as a result of getting measles. Of course, anti-vaxxers refuse to listen to facts.

one could make the case that those using the offensive analogy between vaccines and the Holocaust are guilty of minimizing the Holocaust as a crime

The overwhelming majority of the Holocaust's victims were people killed because of their ancestry, and most of the rest had medical conditions that were no fault of their own.

Parents who choose not to vaccinate their children are making a conscious choice, and are not being murdered because of it. I can feel some sympathy for any ostracized children, who didn't get to choose their parents, and likewise the parents of children who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons. But the parents of otherwise healthy children who refuse vaccinations deserve no sympathy. Just as their right to swing their fist in the air ends at my face, they have no right to recklessly endanger other people's children.

"many of the Gnat’s new 'friends' are most certainly Holocaust Deniers as well."

And fuck you, too.

You know Lawrence, I saved your linkedin profile. Want it to suffer the same fate as Lindsey Graham's phone number?

Jake, based on your previous posts on different threads, it appears that you have autism, and erroneously believe that vaccines caused it.

You really should stop blaming your autism on vaccines, and instead do some real research into what might actually cause autism. From what I've read, there is evidence that the brain abnormalities present in autism are already present in utero (which would rule out vaccines as a possible cause, even if there hadn't already been study after study showing no link between vaccines and autism). I can provide links to these studies if you are interested.

As for the cause of autism, it looks to me like it is mostly genetic. The children of older fathers have a much higher rate of autism, and advanced paternal age is associated with an increasing number of de novo mutations, some of which may cause autism. The link between advanced paternal age and autism spectrum disorders is strong, and multiple studies have confirmed that the link exists.

In a small number of cases, autism occurs as part of a known genetic syndrome, like Fragile X Syndrome or Tuberous Sclerosis, but that doesn't account for most cases.

#12 - Joel A. Harrison,
It's all part of AoA's policy of providing their readers with all the disinformation they need to make a vaccination decision through "disInformed Consent".
Their policy is apparently - 'If you can't lie to your supporters, who can you lie to?'
I believe Babs Low Fisher's NVdisIC also has such a policy.

May 31, 2017 You Won't Believe What They Admitted on the News in 1971...

https://youtu.be/yfaAtdTgBGk

Jake-IF you are willing to consider that your views are incorrect, I suggest that read these links:

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-26750786

http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1104609

Unfortunately, I highly doubt that you are willing to admit that you beliefs about the cause of autism are wrong, and therefore I doubt that you will even read these articles. People like you typically ignore any evidence that challenges their belief system.

The whole infant mortality point is interesting, because not only does the US have an equivalent schedule to just about every other developed nation, but the deciding factor here is that we are one of the only nation's around which doesn't guarantee universal access to health care.

When you compare the infant mortality rates for US children who are white, our rate is certainly near the top of the list, but when you compare the rate with minorities, who have less access to health care - both prenatal and post-natal, our rates climb significantly.

Even the Washington Post article that anti-vaxers like to cite specifically dings us for lack of universal health care, and doesn't mention vaccines, even once.

@Lawrence-Same goes for life expectancy-most of the European countries have a longer average life expectancy than the U.S., and I'm guessing that that's because they have universal healthcare and we don't.

@ Lawrence:

As a longtime supporter of a non-profit single-payer health care system who has lived in Canada, a single-payer system and Sweden, socialized medicine (they are different) and who has studied comparative health care systems, both do a much better job and cost less than ours. Check out Physicians for a National Health Program at: www.pnhp.org

I've been a member of almost 30 years. Their website has a wealth of information, including numerous international comparative studies that show US ranking on almost all variables, except cost, to be towards the bottom.

On only one measure does the US appear to rank high, cancer survival. However, there are problems with this measure:
1. Lead time bias. We do much more preventive screening, so catch some cancers at early stage; however, for instance, if caught at a later stage, treated, and survival, say, 5 years, and earlier screening caught 2 years earlier and survival 7 years, not a difference, though appears so in Stats. And too much preventing screening also leads to false positives and unnecessary risky interventions.
2. We treat pre-cancerous cell dysplasia, e.g. from Pap smears. However, many cell dysplasia won't become cancers; but we include in Stats of lives saved..
3. For instance, Prostate Cancer. Studies have shown that many will not progress to problems for many years, in many cases, patient will die of something else first. Nowadays, based on Swedish studies, often patient counseled about risks from surgery, probability of becoming life-threatening, and adopting watch and wait approach, frequent exams. However, if operate on Prostate cancer that would not have become life-threatening, still include in Stats of lives saved.

I've written about the issue of cancer survival in Europe versus the US before:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/04/24/more-cancer-care-isnt-alwa…

@Lawrence and Brian: the healthcare issue is one, and certainly a major one. However, the US also has different criteria for stillbirths than many other countries. Many countries include gestational age/birth weight in their requirements; in the US it's a live birth even if it's a 20 week gestation and under 500 grams.

But yes, many studies have shown that non-white (Hispanic, African-American) persons have a much higher infant mortality rate.

Universal healthcare and paid maternity leave would, in many cases, help improve our states.

And, Brian, as has been pointed out above, many of the countries with scores much higher than ours have essentially the same immunization recommendations.

If you want, you can compare the various European countries..look at those near the top of the scale like Sweden, Norway, Denmark.

http://vaccine-schedule.ecdc.europa.eu/Pages/Scheduler.aspx

I find this whole "infant mortality" argument to be a prime example of anti-vaxer ignoring the actual elephant in the room (lack of health care access) and putting the blame on vaccines instead, for no real reason.

Orac asks,

Tell me again how all this is “not antivaccine” ...

MJD says,

It appears the "anti-vaccine" rhetoric presented is intended to protect persons under 5-years of age. (i.e., vaccines can cause harm and/or autism in young children)

The U.S. Census Bureau (July 1, 2015) has determined that 6.2% of the population is under 5 years of age.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/AGE135215/00

If 93.8% of the population (i.e., persons > 5 years old) fail to encompass the "anti-vaccine" rhetoric we can ask the following question:

Q. If a person questions the safety of vaccines, independent of the rhetoric, towards a very small percentage of the population are they considered "anti-vaccine".

If the answer is NO, Orac's "anti-vaccine" classification is in dispute and "Vaccine Safety Advocate" terminology may be considered.

1. I doubt Ms. Hayes would be in pediatricians parking lots herself - she's just calling for others to do it. Her kids are grown up. I would add that there are likely limits on the ability of providers to limit people expressing opinions at least near their facilities, but individuals harassed can certainly complain to the police.

And it would be sad if parents, already dealing with a lot, would have to deal with this harassment on top. Of course, I expect only a few are extreme enough to follow up on Ms. Hayes' suggestions.

2. The insert is not just not designed as an informed consent document, it's not suited to it. In fact, just going over the insert would not fill the requirements of informed consent. For example, it doesn't include the benefits of the treatment - the vaccine, omitting a major part of what patients need to hear. The language is also formulaic in ways not geared to the purposes of informed consent, and not designed to be accessible. It's simply not fitted to that purpose.

At least we don't have to worry about Jake ever breeding.

It would seem that he's using his personality as a contraceptive.

I doubt Ms. Hayes would be in pediatricians parking lots herself – she’s just calling for others to do it. Her kids are grown up. I would add that there are likely limits on the ability of providers to limit people expressing opinions at least near their facilities, but individuals harassed can certainly complain to the police.

I would also think that owners of pediatrics practices could complain to the police about such people trespassing on their private property.

On their property, yes. But I expect the antis would learn from anti-abortion activists quickly and be present at the entry to the property or something like that. Harassing people in parking lots isn't a new idea, after all.

"If the answer is NO, Orac’s “anti-vaccine” classification is in dispute and “Vaccine Safety Advocate” terminology may be considered."

Considered only by people as low on intellect and integrity as Michael J. Dochniak.

I would say that I'm surprised that the anti-vaxers haven't attempted to replicate the anti-abortion's strategy of targeting clinics, but when you combine the fact that there are pediatricians everywhere (and only a few abortion clinics) and that the anti-vax movement is significantly smaller, they don't have the resources to pull it off, not even close.

But, they can be a pain in the neck for specific pediatricians, if they wanted to be. That's what I'm worried about in this case.

He also appears to have epic anger management issues as well.....combined with Don Quixote syndrome for good measure.

Through the magic of crank magnetism an anti-vaxxer is also likely to be or become a Holocaust denier. I guess then they'd have to stop using that analogy or risk vanishing in a puff of logic.

"Crank Magnetism" is a well-known phenomenon - it is quite possible for conspiracy theorists to hold true to multiple different conspiracies (Holocaust Denial, AIDS denial, the Illuminati, Chemtrails, UFOs, HAARP, etc), even when those conspiracies are at odds with each other.

I'm trying to remember a game I used to play in College, which was based around collecting cards representing all of the various conspiracy theories and groups, and you had to lead your faction to victory (the Greys vs. the Illuminati, vs. the Rothchild's, vs. Reptiliians, etc.)

It was a great game, I really need to see if I can find a copy.

Ms. Hayes that she realizes that no insurance company is going to maintain a list of doctors who don’t vaccinate or even a list of doctors who don’t require proof of vaccination before accepting a child into their practice.

Oh, they might. Of course, it would be a blacklist.

@ Young Mr. Crosby's comments on this thread.

Fuck you, you call us Holocaust deniers.

And vaccines are cancer. . . .
“many of the Gnat’s new ‘friends’ are most certainly Holocaust Deniers as well.”

. . .
And fuck you, too.

You know Lawrence, I saved your linkedin profile. Want it to suffer the same fate as Lindsey Graham’s phone number?

I suspect that many of your potential employers and professional associates will be suitably impressed by both your academic prowess and charming rhetorical skills displayed on the internet. Your future is likely assured. Stay classy, Grasshopper.

Thanks to those anti-vaxers propaganda a Dutch pediatrician was stabbed in her face, by a woman who blamed her child's autism to the vaccinations.
The pediatrician might not be able to work again.
I have tried to find something in English, but alas I can only find sources in Dutch. Perhaps Google translate can help.
https://kloptdatwel.nl/2017/05/31/antivaccinatiefabeltje-leidt-tot-moor…

If a person questions the safety of vaccines, independent of the rhetoric, towards a very small percentage of the population are they considered “anti-vaccine”.

If those questions and concerns have been answered and addressed multiple times, and that person and others like him continue to ask those same questions, can we then call them a delusional anti-vaccine loon? Doesn't that more accurately reflect the current reality?

Peebs (#34) writes,

At least we don’t have to worry about Jake ever breeding.

MJD says,

That's so insensitive and borderline defamation of character based on his diagnosis.

@ Jake Crosby,

May your vaccine-safety journey be handled with compassion, honesty, integrity, and an open mindedness. Good Luck!

@MJD-They are anti-vaccine, not "vaccine safety advocates", as many of them like to be called, because, as Johnny noted above, their "questions" have been answered over and over and over again, and yet they have remained just as opposed to vaccination as ever.

Also, while you try to argue that anti-vaxxers are opposed only to vaccines for infants/young children, that's not true-the same people who oppose childhood vaccines are generally opposed to adult vaccinations (e.g., the flu shot) as well. The people at AoA are also against the HPV vaccine, too, even though that vaccine is not given until 10-12 years of age-so your assertion that they are opposed only to vaccination of children under 5 is simply false. But even if they were, they'd still be accurately described as anti-vaccine.

Dorit-Yes, as long as they stayed outside of the building, it would probably be protected under the First Amendment-if I recall correctly, the law that established"buffer zones" around abortion clinics, to protect patients from harassment by anti-abortion protesters, was struck down a few years ago.

@MJD-Jake is obviously completely anti-vaccine-to describe him as advocating for "safe vaccines" is laughable. Earlier today, he stated "vaccines are cancer."-if that's not antivaccine, I don't know what is.

MJD has obviously never bothered to check out the Gnat's site.....those four attributes are not in evidence, anywhere.

In yet another exposition of his lack of self awareness, Jacob Lawrence Crosby, MPH, asked on his blog, "Who wants their kid going through life being a socially repugnant loser who thinks they owe nothing to society by refusing to fit in?" before he posted "fuck you" responses here and threatened a commenter.

"You know Lawrence, I saved your linkedin profile. Want it to suffer the same fate as Lindsey Graham’s phone number?"

That reminds me. I have to thank Jake for pointing out who Lawrence is in real life. I've friended him, and he seems like a good chap, a proper chap.

You know whose LinkedIn profile I found and follow? Alex Cranberg*. Now, he seems like someone you don't mess around with. Such a fierce look on his face.

*Alex Cranberg is a regent in the University of Texas system. He is also Jake's uncle. Where's Jake working on that PhD, again?

Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH @9

I would add myocarditis or pericarditis to your list of chicken pox complications.This happened to me when I had chicken pox as a child.I also had shingles,twice,before age 40.This is the sort of stuff you have to expect when you live with a primary immune deficiency.

MJD has obviously never bothered to check out the Gnat’s site…

I believe that to be true. I also believe MJD didn't see Jake's post #20, due to profanity filtering.

However, at this point I have to believe he now has, and in my mind there is just one question - does he stand by his post (currently) #46?

How about it, MJD? Do you still think Jake is a reasonable vaccine safety advocate?

Alex Cranberg is a regent in the University of Texas system. He is also Jake’s uncle. Where’s Jake working on that PhD, again?

The scuttlebutt is 'not there'. Word around town is Jake liveswith mommy down in Florida these days. I dunno for sure, and Jake doesn't seem to want to say one way or the other.

I cannot recall a single vaccine that’s ever been endorsed by anyone writing at AoA.

John Stone has grudgingly accepted rubella vaccination for baby mamas in case they are not so fortunate to be infected before it's breedin' time.

Way, way, way back in the day, I attempted to get the folks at AoA to give their opinion on the Rabies vaccine.....and all I got was crickets.

AoA has published rants on how rabies vaccine supposedly gave a child autism. And Kent H. wrote a piece speculating that rabies vaccine can give pets rabies.

All in a day's work for folks who are constantly foaming at the mouth about immunization.

@ Roger Kulp:

It would have been impossible to list every rare condition. The point I was making is that Smallpox and Chickenpox are NOT similar, not even close. If you have a primary immune disorder, you probably would not have survived smallpox, so, lucky we had a high smallpox vaccination rate in US.

Oh, The Gnat’s parents are rich enough that I’m sure he has a very large, comfy bedroom and office in their house.

You'd think they could spring for a decent call girl, as well.

"The scuttlebutt is ‘not there’. Word around town is Jake lives with mommy down in Florida these days. I dunno for sure, and Jake doesn’t seem to want to say one way or the other."

If he's in the dissertation phase of his doctorate (and if UT runs their doctoral programs like my school does, which is probable), he doesn't need to be around campus, just in touch with his academic/thesis advisor(s). He can be back home, with mom or whomever, diligently going through data and writing his dissertation. Or he could also be working as an epidemiologist, helping local/state/federal agencies fight the next wave of Zika, or advising them on Ebola...

Full disclosure: I didn't finish writing that with a straight face.

MJD says,

That’s so insensitive and borderline defamation of character based on his diagnosis.

No, you're just an imbecile. You wouldn't know the basis of a defamation claim from a fυcking hole in the ground.

Exactly. The Gnat doesn't have problems with women because he's autistic. He has problems with women because of his toxic personality.

Jake, based on your previous posts on different threads, it appears that you have autism, and erroneously believe that vaccines caused it.

Jake claims fo be autistic as an excuse for what he is, but it seems to be self-diagnosis.

I’m trying to remember a game I used to play in College, which was based around collecting cards representing all of the various conspiracy theories and groups, and you had to lead your faction to victory

"Illuminati"?

Ren - the Equalizer! Almost as cool as Edward Woodward. Or am i showing my age by remembering that show?

I was referring to #52 of Ren's.

I’m trying to remember a game I used to play in College, which was based around collecting cards representing all of the various conspiracy theories and groups, and you had to lead your faction to victory (the Greys vs. the Illuminati, vs. the Rothchild’s, vs. Reptiliians, etc.)

You're probably thinking of Illuminati by Steve Jackson Games. I also played it once back in college.

"Kent H. wrote a piece speculating that rabies vaccine can give pets rabies."
Then he is even more far gone than even I would have thought, considering that the Rabies vaccine is a killed virus vaccine and thus *cannot possibly* cause the disease.

Then again, I think he's the one who subjected his daughter to stem cell "treatments" in Costa Rica to try to cure her autism, so I guess nothing coming from him should surprise me.

@Lawrence #41: Illuminati. Steve Jackson Games. The company is still in business and the game is probably still in print as it was one of their better selling non-RPGs.

@Jake Crosby #20: Wow. That's a threat. A weak pathetic threat, but a threat. No wonder Orac refers to you as the Gnat.

But back to the discussion of what really matters: the sheer bat s*** craziness of AoA . . . .

As bad as the comments from the commentors identifying themselves as nurses are, there's one that sent chills up my spine: some nurse named Tracy was bragging about handing out anti vax propaganda cards and convincing new parents to skip the Hep B initial vaccination. The only silver lining is she's gotten caught once, and will hopefully get caught again soon and fired. The bad news is the hospital probably won't report her to the BON for discipline. . . . and they should.

One of the amusing things about the perpetual screaming of 'holocaust' from the antivaxx side is that t most of them wouldn't have had any significant disagreements with the Nazis on the treatment of the disabled, and wouldn't hesitate to turn over their own kids(Yeah, Jake, your parents would sell you out in a heartbeat..) Not to mention the overlap between being anti-vax and anti-semitic, which grows by the day.

Peebs: Yah, and he thinks the problem is with everyone else. To the point where he's actually claimed that every autistic woman is a lesbian because they won't settle for a donkey like him.

@Politicalguineapig-I wouldn't go anywhere near that far, but I do understand what you are saying-in that the anti-vax "autism moms" are always whining about "stress", "caregiver burnout", their autistic children being a "burden" etc.

PGP, Wow; and I thought I was taking the piss.

Dear Orac,
your review of my article on vaccine nanocontamination had a great effect in Italy and some bloggers who have little imagination and little time to spare translated that into Italian, sometimes adding some mistakes or meaning to summarize wrote blunders. There was a discussion among common people and some supposed to be scientists, but none 9f them accepted to repeat the analyses. Great fear ! I agree with you that it is a world of sheep. Very superficially you attacked the article in its form, but couldn't demonstrate that images and spectra were wrong.
You are in contact with pharmaceutical industries; so could you suggest them, in order to increase the safety of vaccines, to prevent this contamination? Most particles are markers showing the possible origin of contamination and I can identify their presence at some stages of the industrial process of preparation. I believe that that could be extremely important in case contamination should be avoided. Of course there is no interest if contamination is what is desired..

@Lawrence:

I’m trying to remember a game I used to play in College, which was based around collecting cards representing all of the various conspiracy theories and groups, and you had to lead your faction to victory (the Greys vs. the Illuminati, vs. the Rothchild’s, vs. Reptiliians, etc.)

@Narad:

“Illuminati“?

Yeah, I was about to link to http://www.sjgames.com/illuminati/ myself. Played that game a fair bit in University in the late 1980s. (Managed to win a game by getting everybody else to focus on the Gnomes of Zurich as the main threat while building up power myself as The Network.) There was a collectible card game version (Illuminati: New World Order) in the 1990s that was also fun.

Wow. Mr. Gatti sounds truly desperate. Sir, there isn't a chance in hell that Orac is going to contact Big Pharma on your behalf to support an idea he's already dissected and believes to be wrong.

I'm mean really . . . you don't insult a man one minute and then ask him for a favor the next.

That's the one!

Thanks guys. I need to find me a copy for the next game night.

I organized a VAXXED movie showing and NO ONE from the conventional healthcare field came.

Yet, when Dr Lance O'Sullivan attended the showing in Kaitaia, they all lost their marbles.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/watch-dr-lance-osullivan-un…

your review of my article on vaccine nanocontamination had a great effect in Italy and some bloggers who have little imagination and little time to spare translated that into Italian, sometimes adding some mistakes or meaning to summarize wrote blunders

It's easy to find examples of Italian bloggers citing the Oracian analysis. Case in point, Antonio Scalari at "Blue Suitcase". As for their distortions of the analysis, though, perhaps Dr Gatti can highlight these?

Scalari notes in passing:

Sia La Stampa che La Repubblica, riprendendo il comunicato del Codacons, definiscono Montanari e Gatti due "specialisti in nanotecnologie". In realtà si definiscono esperti in "nanopatologie" (un termine di fatto assente in letteratura e che in Rete si ritrova quasi sempre in documenti a firma di Montanari, Gatti o entrambi).

You are in contact with pharmaceutical industries
[Citation Needed], as the kids like to say.

Forgot the Scalari link:
http://www.valigiablu.it/vaccini-codacons/

Wow. Mr. Gatti sounds truly desperate.
Dottora Gatti, Panacea.

Good grief, AoA is suggesting people *hang out* in pediatrician waiting rooms?
Even if the parents didn't get way upset at you, even if the staff didn't call security or the police to throw you out, think about who is in the waiting room of a pediatrician.
Little kids. Probably sick little kids. Kids who are too young to cover their mouths when they sneeze or cough, too young to verbalize when they are about to throw up.
You'd catch half the diseases known to humanity (the remaining being divided between arthropod vector diseases and STIs).

And what makes these anti-vaxxers assume that the parents have no thoughts on vaccination? What if you run into a practice full of pro-vax families? Something something momma bears?

Dragging around your sick or developmentally delayed child as a dancing bear is just cruel on top of everything else.

Johnny (#54) writes,

How about it, MJD? Do you still think Jake is a reasonable vaccine safety advocate?

MJD says,

Your asking me a direct question, I thought we agreed that we weren't going to do that.

Although, being judgmental is not in my training.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-j-dochniak-4363104

There's always an exception, Narad (#62) is an Orac minion with a nasty disposition.

@ Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH
To be pedantic you can get permanent scarring from chicken pox, at least if fifty years counts as permanent? It is less likely, and or course much less severe, but I assure you it does happen.

While the two issues aren't exactly alike, the increasingly bizarre rhetoric of the anti-vaxxers does bear some similarity to the anti-choice movement: imagined persecution, conflating fantasy with reality, and advocating violence. I wish physicians had banded together instead of letting abortion become a marginalized procedure performed in specialized clinics. If every gynecologist performed abortions in their offices, it would be far more difficult to target individual Doctors. Instead they caved to the pressures of the lunatic fringe, and now most counties in the United States have no abortion providers. Vaccinations are simple to give to patients, but without courageous opposition, the anti-vax movement could become just as deadly as the anti-choice faction. Reading over this and the science based medicine website, it disappoints me that the Doctors who contribute here don't more firmly address the murders of physicians who provide abortions; instead it is largely ignored. All it will take are Doctors deciding that providing vaccinations isn't worth the trouble or risk, plus more success in creating fanatical followers and perhaps some elected representatives to fall in with them to result in a country where people will have to drive hundreds of miles to get their shots. The advantage of vaccinations is that not getting them will mean outbreaks of disease, disability and death, which will quickly mobilize people to start vaccinating, and those deaths will affect boys and girls alike. Unwanted pregnancies carried to term remain largely invisible, the consequences falling mostly on poorer women, who are all too easily ignored or blamed for their problems.

@HDB: apologies. I used the AP convention.

Very superficially you attacked the article in its form, but couldn’t demonstrate that images and spectra were wrong.

It is your interpretation of the images and spectra and the experimental design that led to them that are wrong.

@Cloudskimmer. I am pro-choice, and I agree with you.

However, I understand why abortion rights are not discussed here, and I'm pretty sure that the rationale is this: if RI or SBM became known as pro-choice blogs, it would drive away those who are anti-abortion, and, considering that a sizable minority of Americans are still opposed to abortion, that would likely turn off a substantial number of people, who would otherwise read RI and SBM.

Remember, there are far more people who are anti-choice than there are who are anti-vax, and if Orac is trying to reassure people who may be concerned about vaccinations, or steer people away from dubious "alternative treatments", then talking about an issue as controversial about abortion might be counterproductive.

I think that Orac stays away from writing in support of abortion rights for the same reason that Steven Novella specifically makes a point of stating that his blog is nonpartisan.

Gatti's so-called "research" is not better than when Mike Adams looked at a chicken mcnugget under his microscope and shouted "contaminants". Substitute Gatti for Adams and a vaccine vial for mcnugget and you've got the same sophomoric stupidity.

Hehehe. I might have to look up those links to throw in Gatti's face.

While the two issues aren’t exactly alike, the increasingly bizarre rhetoric of the anti-vaxxers does bear some similarity to the anti-choice movement

There is a lot of overlap between the two causes. You've got god-botherers all hot-and-bothered about HPV vaccines, for fear that they might encourage sex (sex should be punished with cancer as god intended). Not to forget the Catholic bishops in Kenya and the Philippines who did not receive any financial or power-related kickbacks from vaccination programs, and therefore denounce those programs as concealed birth control.

And there are the various Alt-Med scammers who want to conflate the two causes, and present antivax / food-purity / Alt-Med as a natural extension of the theocratic forced-birth belief system, in the hope of increasing their customer base. So 'Natural News' regularly plays human centipede with "fetus-in-our-food!" fabrications from christianists.

I have been a long time follower of this blog, but finally decided I needed to post a comment.

When anti-vaxxers spew their crap, I basically have this to say: Smallpox. The smallpox vaccine basically saved my life. See, it all had to do with herd immunity. I was unable to get the smallpox boosters back in the late 60's very early 70's since I had (and still have) eczema and well, the smallpox vaccine does something really not fun and very dangerous to people with certain skin conditions. But, instead of being against vaccines, I'm actually for them because thanks to EVERYONE ELSE getting the smallpox vaccine, I didn't have to worry about getting smallpox. So, herd immunity saved me from getting a potentially life threatening disease. The way I was told I couldn't get the booster (I did get the initial vaccine and luckily nothing adverse happened) was done so incredibly well by the nurse who told me, that it never occurred to me what the real reason could be until one of my idiot friends decided to go on anti-vaxx tirade and chose the smallpox vaccine to villify. That's when I found out about the potential skin reaction I could have gotten. It just made me more pro-vaccine.

Don't even get me started on the number of adults I met in my childhood/youth that had polio as children and were disabled because of it. Yup, pro-vaccine I am!

Still, I was an exception to the rule and because of a valid medical condition, I couldn't receive one life saving vaccine. I am 100% up to date on my shots...all of them. I have a reaction to every single one of them, including rashes, severe pain, some fatigue (which just could be nerves because getting shots always make me a bit nervous) but nothing life threatening, so I still get 'em, even though they make me uncomfortable.

I even had shingles once in my early 40s...I had a very uncomfortable reaction to the shingles shot (including a huge rash that was very painful) but got it once they cleared me to get it. I'll get it again too when I need to.

Another friend of mine who cannot get the measles shots for medical reasons almost died from encephalitis when exposed to some idiot's kid who didn't get vaccinated and got the measles. Another friend almost lost her newborn to pertussis because the people around her didn't get vaccinated. Thankfully the baby pulled through and is a very healthy, active teenager now - but for years she had numerous tests to make sure her lungs were working as they should and other tests to make sure she suffered no damage. Doctors told my friend she was very lucky indeed. It could have been much, much worse.

Anti-vaxxers just piss me off.

Your asking me a direct question, I thought we agreed that we weren’t going to do that.

News to me, but I admit there are times I talk about you and not to you.

Although, being judgmental is not in my training.

Up at # 46, you say of friend Peebs "That’s so insensitive and borderline defamation of character based on his diagnosis." We know you have an alternate definition of 'vaccine safety advocate ', and it looks like you have an alternate definition of 'judgmental'.

There’s always an exception, Narad (#62) is an Orac minion with a nasty disposition.

You do seem to bring that out in people.

This mask does not filter tiny viral particles.

So late to the party but yes Ms. Hayes N97 masks certainly do filter viral particles (better for out than in however).

If he’s in the dissertation phase of his doctorate (and if UT runs their doctoral programs like my school does, which is probable), he doesn’t need to be around campus, just in touch with his academic/thesis advisor(s).

Ah except dear Ren he's not at the dissertation phase since he's still a PhD student, maybe, and certainly not a PhD candidate. Not to mention his very obvious continued degradation signifies something is afoot with Jacob's life right now. His latest screed indicates some epic self-loathing at the very least.

What perfect timing! Got my copy of the June National Geographic Magazine (yes, I'm an old fart!) and there's a ranking of the top ten inventions in history. Vaccines made the list, nowhere near the bottom, at #5. The ranking was done by Carla Hayden, U.S. Librarian of Congress.

Jonas: I wouldn’t go anywhere near that far, but I do understand what you are saying-in that the anti-vax “autism moms” are always whining about “stress”, “caregiver burnout”, their autistic children being a “burden” etc.

I take it you haven't seen the video where one anti-vax mom talks about driving off a bridge with her daughter in the car. Or read much of Age of Autism. To me it always sounds like most anti-vaxxers are one tiiiny second away from abandoning their kids in the woods, and the only thing keeping them from outright murder is the opinions of the neighbors.

Peebs: Yeah, Jakey is basically Reddit and 4chan combined on two legs.

Jonas: I don't see how RI or any of the other blogs being vocal about being pro-choice would drive away readers. Most people who are against abortion are very, very religious, and dislike science intensely. I mean seriously, they'd be more at home with flat-earthers.

There was a discussion among common people and some supposed to be scientists, but none 9f them accepted to repeat the analyses. Great fear ! I agree with you that it is a world of sheep.

I don't recall Orac talking about a "world of sheep" or an equivalent generalization.

That's because I never did.

"Ah except dear Ren he’s not at the dissertation phase since he’s still a PhD student, maybe, and certainly not a PhD candidate."

Ah, I had not noticed that. I wonder if his conduct got in the way of his studies, given how the student code of conduct reads?

And thanks for the compliment, Ren. I do consider myself quite the proper chap.

@ Johnny #93: MJD seems to forget that it isn't defamation if it's true, and what Narad said certainly is true.

@Science Mom #94: Ah, I forgot to address the mask when I posted earlier. It doesn't have to be an N 97 mask, because influenza is droplet precautions not airborne precautions. A regular mask will stop a sneeze from getting into the air, which is the actual point of making people who refuse flu vaccine wear it.

The "nurse' who wrote that is a total twit.

Don't like the mask? Get vaccinated.

HDM: Yes, there is some overlap-in addition to the HPV vaccine and the Kenyan bishops, there are some anti-vaxxers who claim that vaccines "contain aborted fetal cells" and therefore they have a religious/moral objection to certain vaccines.

Polticalguineapig-Yes, you are probably right. Look at Michael Egnor, for example-he's antiabortion, and he also denies evolution, and has even stated (in a comment thread on Steven Novella's blog) that he would "prefer to live in a Catholic theocracy".

there are some anti-vaxxers who claim that vaccines “contain aborted fetal cells” and therefore they have a religious/moral objection to certain vaccines

IIUC, the Catholic Church stipulates that this is not a valid objection to vaccination. When your position on abortion-related matters is even more extreme than the Catholic Church's, you are pretty far out there.

Yes, I know, but there are anti-vaxxers who make that argument anyway, so I thought I'd mention it.
BTW, I do not think that there should be religious (or any non-medical) exemptions to vaccination. In my view, every state should have a law replicating SB77.

I assume that, with the exception of Jake and MJD, everyone else here agrees with me on that point.

Panacea:

@Science Mom #94: Ah, I forgot to address the mask when I posted earlier. It doesn’t have to be an N 97 mask, because influenza is droplet precautions not airborne precautions. A regular mask will stop a sneeze from getting into the air, which is the actual point of making people who refuse flu vaccine wear it.

I thought that was the case, and was hoping someone more knowledgeable would speak up. ;-)

So the nurse who wrote that is extra bad -- she really should know that you don't need to protect against infinitesimal particles when protecting against flu, because all you have to hold back are droplets.

And the mask isn't for her, it's to protect her patients. What a shame she doesn't care about that....

Eric Lund: you are correct. The Catholic Church specifically says that although they'd *prefer* the vaccine not require the use of fetal cells, the lives saved far outweigh the life that was lost long ago, and so not only is abortion not a valid reason to avoid MMR, getting MMR (unless you have medical contraindication) is a religious imperative because it protects life.

There’s always an exception, Narad (#62) is an Orac minion with a nasty disposition.

You do seem to bring that out in people.

Oh, Christ, MJD is bitching because I pointed out that he said something incredibly f*cking stupid about defamation? Blame the campus library for not having Greasemonkey installed on the machines.

If being direct consitutes a "nasty" disposition, I can only wonder what "sort" of disposition describes brain-dead, passive-aggressive malingering.

When is poor Dr. Gatti going to realize that the appropriate response to "your methodology is poor and your conclusions unwarranted" is NOT "Then you must repeat my experiments and disprove them!".

I think that was covered in Basic Research Principles 101.

If being direct consitutes a “nasty” disposition

As Harry S Truman said: "I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell." MJD is free to think you're giving him hell, especially when you are simply telling the truth.

Laura Hayes' brand of delusion is just more evidence that in (most, anyway) AoA-style anti-vax, the fear and loathing of autism is the base, and the vaccine animus the superstructure. My response to 'vaccine holocaust' is that my ASD cousin is different, not dead. PGP has it wrong in suggesting AVs want to murder their kids, because they don't even consider their kids to be alive to begin with, already having been murdered by Bog Pharma. Or maybe they take ASD as worse than death. Since ASD kids are ambulatory, we could say they take them as The Return of The Living Dead monsters eating the flesh of their otherwise cozy haute-bourgeois lives and eating the brain of their sanity. What are the projections for the 'autism epidemic' but fear of a coming Zombie Apocalypse?

It's this that's at the source of the parallels between Hayes writing and the screeds of anti-abortion extremists: She thinks vaccination is murder. To think that, you have to already have an incredibly sick, twisted view of ASD.

Why this matters, of course, is that we want to prevent AV propaganda from leading to more outbreaks, like the recent one in Minnesota. To do so, we must understand the psychology of parents who are vulnerable to the message, and may be dissuaded from immunizing their kids. There aren't near enough cranks who start from a generalized fear of vaccines, or even a predisposition that might lead to such, to create a cluster. (One reason the stereotype of AVs as post-hippie granola-crunchers has been so unfortunate... Never forget the real capital of AV is the arch-conservative OC.) No. Jenny McCarthy remains the paradigmatic case of anti-vax conversion. After her kid was diagnosed with autism, she found her life turned upside down, went on a quest for blame and took awhile to settle on vaccines as the culprit. The line of course is, "I believed they were safe, but now I know better!" Andy Wakefield developed his grift to exploit a group of distraught and disoriented parents in the UK similarly looking for "answers" and a target to blame (and sue). It's not like he was talking to the Minneapolis Somails before the cluster of ASD diagnoses were reported there, either. But when he heard that news, he knew he had a potential group of new converts/marks, so he hopped right on a plane.

This is maybe the main reason why spreading the science of vaccine safety has little or no effect on AV. It's a fundamentally irrational projection rooted in primal emotions that rule how the whole business is processed. Unless those emotions are effectively addressed, challenging the imaginary scaffolding that has been built upon them (that is, at some level it's adherents 'know' it's cockamamie) is so threatening to the primal fears, they just double-down: defending their imaginary Explanation Of It All, as if it was a life or death matter.

Of course, the investments and stakes are lower for those parents who are at risk from getting sucked into anti-vax due to their horror at ASD, so we should be able to make a dent in the conversion rate by addressing those underlying emotions, and doing what we can to show ASD kids and adults as valuable, fully human, beings. To that end, I think it would be great if there was a prominent adult-ASD pro-vax spokeperson who combined that message with appeals for ASD understand and against ASD demonization. (An anti-Gnat?)

I cringe whenever anyone tries to put a bad light on the U.S. infant mortality rate in comparison with the rest of the world. The World Health Organization's definition of infant mortality rate: The number of infants who die between birth and age one, per 1,000 live births. Sounds straightforward, doesn't it? However, here are the many variables in the way that infant mortality rates per 1000 live births are calculated in the USA in comparison with other countries world-wide:

> The USA counts deaths of premature infants, some countries don't.
> In the USA, any sign of life is counted as a live birth - Even if a premature infant takes one breath or one heartbeat is detected. In many countries, they do not count these live births.
> In Austria & Germany, a live birth counted must be at least 500 grams weight (~1 lb.), this is not the case in the USA.
> In Switzerland, a fetus must be at least 30 centimeters long (~12 inches) to be counted.
> In Belgium & France, deaths at less than 26 weeks are not counted.
> Some countries don't reliably count any infant that dies within the first 24 hours of birth.
> As an example, Norway appears to have one of the lowest infant mortality rates but when adjusted for disparate variables between calculating methodologies, their infant mortality rate is comparable to the USA.

So… To sum it all up, the infant mortality reporting algorithms world-wide are a non standardized bio-statistical patchwork quilt. The late Dr. Bernadine Healy analyzed USA infant mortality rates in her "On Health" column in the U.S. News and world Report. Her 2006 article was entitled "Behind the baby count". She was the former NIH director, American Red Cross president AND Age of Autism's 2008 "Person of the Year." She pointed out in the article that the USA records ALL deaths where an infant showed any signs of life while the European countries compute their rates with different parameters like minimum weight, minimum infant length, length of gestation, how long the infant survived, etc. Direct comparison of data is not advisable but when adjusted for the factors she cited, the USA is on a par with most of the European countries.

@sadmar-Speaking of the measles outbreak in MN, the number of cases climbed to 73 today. 68 of the 73 patients are unvaccinated.

As for the idea of "a prominent adult-ASD pro-vax spokeperson who combined that message with appeals for ASD understand and against ASD demonization.", that's basically what those in the "neurodiversity movement" are trying to be. Ari Ne'eman is an example. The "neurodiversity" folks are very critical of the anti-vaxxers.

However, they deny/downplay the fact that ASD is a disabling condition, and the vast majority of people disagree with them on that, which would make them less effective pro-vaccine spokespeople, in my opinion.

@ RobRN:

"In 2005, the United States ranked 30th in the world in infant mortality, behind most European countries, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, and Israel. There are some differences among countries in the reporting of very small infants who may die soon after birth. However, it appears unlikely that differences in reporting are the primary explanation for the United States’ relatively low international ranking. In 2005, 22 countries had infant mortality rates of 5.0 or below. One would have to assume that these countries did not report more than one-third of their infant deaths for their infant mortality rates to equal or exceed the U.S. rate. This level of underreporting appears unlikely for most developed countries.
The United States compares favorably with Europe in the survival of infants born preterm. Infant mortality rates for preterm infants are lower in the United States than in most European countries. However, infant mortality rates for infants born at 37 weeks of gestation or more are generally higher in the United States than in European countries.
The primary reason for the United States’ higher infant mortality rate when compared with Europe is the United States’ much higher percentage of preterm births. In 2004, 1 in 8 infants born in the United States were born preterm, compared with 1 in 18 in Ireland and Finland. Preterm infants have much higher rates of death or disability than infants born at 37 weeks of gestation or more (2–4, 6), so the United States’ higher percentage of preterm births has a large effect on infant mortality rates. If the United States had the same gestational age distribution of births as Sweden, the U.S. infant mortality rate (excluding births at less than 22 weeks of gestation) would go from 5.8 to 3.9 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, a 33% decline. These data suggest that preterm birth prevention is crucial to lowering the U.S. infant mortality rate."

Marian F. MacDorman, Ph.D., and T.J. Mathews, M.S. Behind International Rankings of Infant Mortality: How the United States Compares with Europe. NCHS Data Brief ■ No. 23 ■ November 2009. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db23.pdf

See also: Marian F. MacDorman, Ph.D., and T.J. Mathews, M.S., National Center for Health Statistics; Ashna D. Mohangoo, Ph.D., TNO Child Health, Netherlands; and Jennifer Zeitlin, M.D., Inserm, France. International Comparisons of Infant Mortality and Related Factors: United States and Europe, 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports Volume 63, Number 5 September 24, 2014. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_05.pdf

Please note above: "However, it appears unlikely that differences in reporting are the primary explanation for the United States’ relatively low international ranking."

Lawrence #41: Is it "Illuminati: New World Order"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminati:_New_World_Order

When is poor Dr. Gatti going to realize that the appropriate response to “your methodology is poor and your conclusions unwarranted” is NOT “Then you must repeat my experiments and disprove them!”.

Dr Gatti is also ignoring offers to repeat her experiments, breaking off the correspondence when she is asked to agree on an acceptable protocol.
http://www.butac.it/cose-vaccinazione-danni-provoca/#comment-3329863894

I cannot spend my time reading blog's comments. My priority is to make something real for people who are suffering. You can put your insolence on my mission and laugh at it.
In Italy, I asked a person called Elia Marin (Is he a troll?) to repeat analyses of vaccines under a scanning electron microscope with EDS. You, an American blogger arie n contact with an italian blogger. Aren't you ? Have you lost your self assurance?
Many scientists throughout the world use that instrument (Elia Marin?). You could ask them to perform that analysis they way it should be down.

@Callie: Sadly, I know far too many nurses with that attitude. They make it all about them, for whatever ungodly reason they do. I know far too many nurses who firmly believe getting the flu shot gives you the flu, and there's no convincing them otherwise.

@sadmar: I'm on the spectrum. I advocate vaccination. I know several other Aspie nurses who do the same. We're dismissed out of hand. Emotion is easier to relate to than logic for most people. That's why it always takes something terrible to happen before the public is galvanized to push for action.

@ Panacea

Bracketing that how you approach and frame immunization advocacy matters no matter who you are, those who dismiss you may be the wrong audience for the message – that is, they've already formed an opinion. I'm talking about public spokesfolk, like Paul Offit or Matt Carey. The idea would be that the public voices reach parents before they have firmed up a stance on the issue, and influence how they frame it's terms to begin with.

But, I'd also add that opinion change is a process. Contradicting argument is generally dismissed out of hand the first time it's encountered. And the second and third. If vax refusal is rooted in fear and loathing of ASD, an Aspie nurse doesn't fit the paradigm, and cognitive dissonance kicks in. As (the sometimes foolishly maligned) Tom Kuhn observed, when contradictions pile up over time, paradigms can change.

Don't think of yourself as doing nothing because you get dismissed. Think of yourself as, if nothing else, at least putting a potentially irritating pea under the anti-vax mattress.

#116 Dr. Harrison:
Thanks for the additional references re infant mortality in the USA. I've noted that there's no mention of the USA's vaccination schedule as a causative factor in infant mortality as alleged by many anti-vax groups.

@ RobRN:

SInce there is literally overwhelming evidence that vaccinations reduce infant mortality, it would be unnecessary to mention it. The smallpox vaccine alone in the 20th Century as the WHO program went from 3rd World Nation to 3rd World nation, the mortality rates from smallpox went to zero. Since there were NO other changes, e.g. better healthcare, nutrition, etc. that occurred at the same time, only the vaccination program can have been responsible. In addition, though the US includes more vaccines than somel other nations in its vaccine schedule, they are mainly given later, so the vaccines given in the first year would be fairly similar.

It would be a futile gesture to write reports targeted at dealing with the illogic, lack of science, lack of knowledge of history of infectious diseases, and lack of common sense that underlies antivaccinationist arguments. The very fact that life expectancy has gained so much, based not on people living longer; but mainly on lower infant mortality with vaccines playing a major role that they refuse to accept.

Sadmar: heh. Irritating pea. I like it.

I never tell patients I'm an Aspie. I'm afraid of the very reaction you cite. :(

"You know Lawrence, I saved your linkedin profile. Want it to suffer the same fate as Lindsey Graham’s phone number?"

Widdle Jakey thinks he's so scawwy - but to any parent who's had a 2-year old, his tantrums just seem tots adorbs (as the young folks say). Whatever Orac's paying Jake to be the public face of the pro-disease movement is well worth the money.

Panacea - awkward situation! On one level, it's no one's business if you have a yeast infection or are an Aspie. On the other hand, there is so much negative attention paid to people on the extreme of the syndrome. Do you want to live as a shining example of a "good Aspie"? But attitudes will never change if we don't be open.

Speaking as someone who is probably high functioning but not diagnosed, with others in the family - past and present. I'm also speaking as somewhere who realizes that many academics and co-workers I've known were on the spectrum - but regarded as just odd.

What to do!

At 1 in 68 (CDC and I'm bound to be unscientific but I'll assume prevalence is the same in adult for management purpose), we're bound to witness a royal bunch of undiagnosed but odd peoples.

It's been some time I've been thinking of the issue of vaccination and also, autism and it seem to me that these were two separate topics which has got intermixed (is that a word??). On the one hand, we have the past history of autism with one of the superstar being Ivar Lovaas and a few others (refrigerator mother anyone...) who paved the way for a bad reputation in the psych science world and on the other hand, there is the vilification of vaccine which has been going on since forever (witness NWO et al in the other post / thread, impurification of the bloodline...). Special snowflakes with IQ off the chart (220 IQ level...you know what a bellcurve look like) but that impure vaccine series got it down to 160 and presto, diagnostic of autism. Remember that wakefraud was always on the MMR likely causing crown's disease but as soon as the lawyer got involved, he changed his tune to autism where the vilification has already been done, thus having a stronger case to "help" desperate parents and increase his superstar status.

That kind of damage is better countered by a many-pronged attack: at least, many anti-gnats, addressing the impurification of the bloodline, and many other things and it's been since sadmar commented on the issue that I've been thinking about it but never commented before (commitments....)

That said, I wanted this out of my mind right now.

I'll post a bit more later.

Alain

Last question:

If wakefraud stayed on the case of MMR causing crown's disease and never got involved WRT autism, where would the gnat be today?

Hi, Alain,

I think you mean Crohn's Disease :) Named after the physician who first identified it.

But to answer your question: still living in his parent's basement.

Dr. Gatti: It is not up to Orac to do your homework for you. Or anyone else for that matter.

You have to do your own research and make it convincing. You didn't. It's on YOU to address the identified flaws and fix your own argument. If you can't do that, it's your problem.

Are we being unfair to Dr. Gatti?

Maybe in her remote corner of the Italian academic research establishment, aspiring scientists are allowed to respond to criticism of their deeply flawed PhD theses and other failing efforts by demanding that their professors and peers replicate their findings or else shut up.

This would explain the bizarre output of certain Italian researchers, including those of the Ramazzini Foundation and the guy who pioneered "liberation" surgery for MS. Most likely, certain Italian jurists are trained in similar fashion, evident from Italian court rulings that vaccination causes autism, that cellphone radiation induces brain cancer, and convicting Italian scientists who failed to accurately predict a devastating earthquake of manslaughter.

Dr. Gatti announces that she is trying to "make" sonething "real" for people who are suffering. Conducting very flawed work hoping to find yet another spurious reason to blame vaccines for autism isn't helping anyone. People with autism need acceptance, therapy to cope and employment that utilizes their considerable strengths.

Not whining about "evil" vaccines.

The violent rhetoric of the antivaccine movement: "Vaccine Holocaust" and potential impending attacks on journalists

oracknows — Wed, 17 May 2017 04:00:39 +0000

The violent rhetoric of the antivaccine movement: "Vaccine Holocaust" and potential impending attacks on journalists

After yesterday's post about how antivaxers were utterly losing their mind about an ill-chosen idiom that appeared in a Boston Herald editorial last week. In it, the editor concluded by saying that how antivaxers have been preying on the Somali immigrant population in Minnesota, feeding them antivaccine misinformation that has resulted in two measles outbreaks, one in 2011 and one this year, which is up to 58 victims, a number that continues to climb, should be a "hanging offense." In my post, I emphasized the hypocrisy and disingenuousness of the response of antivaxers, who took an offhand use of a questionable idiom and turned it into headlines blaring that the Boston Herald is advocating death squads to undertake the mass murder of antivaxers. Basically, antivaxers routinely use imagery on a daily basis far more violent than an offhand quip about a "hanging offense," such as photos in which antivaccine mothers brandish large caliber weapons to defend their children against depraved pro-vaxers, idiots like Del Bigtree say that antivaxers should take up arms to resist the new California law eliminating nonmedical exemptions to school vaccine requirements (which he hilariously walked back when called on it), and all manner of antivaxers liken the vaccination program to rape, the Holocaust, Nazis, the Titanic, the Oklahoma City bombing, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, and a tsunami.

In fact, I couldn't help but laugh when I saw a particularly odious antivaxer, Ginger Taylor practically beg her fellow antivaxers not to threaten violence or use antisemitic language criticizing the Herald's editorial page editor Rachelle Cohen. Cohen, not surprisingly, has gotten a lot of hate mail, including (predictably, given her name) antisemitic hate mail, complete with a large volume of antisemitic calls and e-mails, leading her to observe drolly (and quite correctly), “Discussions that begin with how sorry folks are I’m not headed for ‘the ovens’ [are] not likely to be fruitful.” (prominently featured was a comment about how disappointed an antivaxer was that she wasn't being sent to the ovens). It amuses me to no end how antivaxers so gleefully make my points for me. Ginger basically has to beg her readers to knock it off with violent imagery far worse than the poorly chosen quip about a “hanging” offense that she now finds oh-so-offensive, coupled with Nazi level antisemitism. Hilarity indeed. I’d almost feel sorry for Ms. Taylor, but she brings it on herself—with gusto—and her Dunning-Kruger arrogance of ignorance is off the charts. However, compared to what's going on now, Ms. Taylor is merely an amusing sideline, as you will see. I realize that some of this will be a little repetitive of yesterday's post, but I consider this important enough to cover again, but from a different angle.

While it was fun to focus on the hypocrisy, what was less fun was what I learned later in the day and only mentioned in addendums. Specifically, it's a very conscious campaign on the part of antivaxers, led by Mike Adams, to threaten and intimidate journalists criticizing the antivaxers who have been spreading misinformation among the Somali community. To give you an idea where he's coming from, he's recently set up a website that he calls Vaccine Holocaust. (Obviously, anything resembling subtlety or good taste was never Adams' strong suit.) At the top of the headlines last night when I perused the website was More children harmed by VACCINES than from GUNSHOTS, government statistics reveal. It's a truly hilariously dumb article in which someone named Lance D. Johnson (who deserves all the ridicule he can get for writing this) takes a look at the horrific statistics on gunshot injuries and deaths among children in the US and compares them to the number of adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database, the vast majority of which are minor and many of the rest not even related to vaccines because lawyers have been encouraging parents to report "vaccine injury" for a long time. Basically, it's comparing data from a verified database (the National Database of Inpatient Stays for Children) to that of a database where the reports are not verified (VAERS) and parents can report that vaccines turned someone into the Incredible Hulk and have the report entered.

The stupid, it burns.

But Vaccine Holocaust is about more than just flaming stupidity. It's about naked intimidation; that is, if Adams actually goes through with his threats. As is his wont, Adams claims to have reported the editorial staff of the Boston Herald to the FBI, the Massachusetts Attorney General, the Boston Police, and more. Not surprisingly, the Attorney General didn't take him seriously (as well he shouldn't have, given the First Amendment). I'm sure there were many chuckles in the Attorney General's office though, likely coupled with a whole lot of facepalming. From this Adams, again, as is his wont, concludes that it's the beginning of a huge conspiracy to murder antivaxers based on the raving of an equally deluded antivaxer, Jeffery Jaxen:

Beta testing, sometimes referred to user acceptance testing, is defined in the computer world as a technique in which hardware is subjected to small trial environment before full implementation. Establishment media outlets and government health agencies have ramped up the pressure and targeting of families, parents, and children over the past few years. Vaccination, once a choice after careful deliberation over the dangers by way of full informed consent, has been painted as an authoritarian demand by the state. The removal of full informed consent, public health debates and medical choice has been superseded to make way for the ever-expanding profit margins of pharmaceutical corporations.

Media outlets now regularly attack and dehumanize anyone who does not subscribe to what can only be described as a religious-like dogma of the failing tenets of the medical-industrial complex. Humanity has witnessed governments and their mouthpieces, often with corporate collusion, attempt to divide and conquer their populations for the purpose of greater control and, in extreme cases, extermination. The slippery slope practice of painting innocent subgroups of society, often used as scapegoats for failed government policy, as a danger to the collective is well-documented and extremely dangerous.

To pave the way for California Senate Bill 277, marinated in Big Pharma money and political corruption, The LA Times ran the article titled "Rich, educated and stupid parents are driving the vaccination crisis." Such a headline now seems tame in today's accepted media landscape ever since the Boston Herald labeled public debate about questionable health practices and parents talking about their children's vaccine injuries "a hanging offense."

You can guess what's coming next. Jaxen cites Anthony Mawson's terrible study that was retracted from not just one, but two, bottom-feeding predatory pay-to-publish "open access" journals without mentioning the little bit about the retraction, and concludes that more fascism in the service of "forced vaccination" is on the way. Not surprisingly, Adams eats this up. Unfortunately, though, he takes it in a truly ugly direction. Based on the Attorney General's recognizing a crank when he sees one (or, quite possibly, a bunch of cranks if several more antivaxers complained), Adams thinks himself justified to do this:

In other words, the Massachusetts government has just told anti-vaxxers that you must now take up your own self-defense against journo-terrorists, since the “authorities” in government refuse to apply the law to those who work at the Boston Herald. Your lives are now in danger. You are being targeted by the Boston Herald and any number of psychopaths who may be motivated by the Herald’s call for mass murder. The government has now declared it will do nothing to stop the calls for murder by “journalists” as long as they are targeting people who oppose toxic vaccine ingredients.

It’s time to start publishing the home addresses of journo-terrorists who escalate violence against concerned parents and independent scientists

This all explains why I plan to publish the home addresses of the journo-terrorists working at the Boston Herald, in order to warn local Bostonians that they might be living next to murderous, sociopathic mental health miscreants who are a danger to society. Since the Massachusetts government refuses to take any action to protect the public from these dangerous psychopaths, it’s obvious that we must take action to protect ourselves. The right to self-defense, after all, is one of the most sacred rights we possess.

Our non-profit division is also launching the public education site VaccineHolocaust.org where journo-terrorists who deny that vaccines harm children will be named and shamed, providing a permanent record of their crimes against children and humanity.

There is a "protest" planned for tomorrow at the Boston Herald being publicized by a local antivaccine group, Health Choice Massachusetts. As of last night there were 23 saying they were going, a whole five up from the night before. In any case, at this "rally," Adams is urging people to do this:

Bring your cameras to the protest! Natural News plans to publish photos of Boston Herald staff members walking to and from the building, their vehicle license plate numbers and other details, to the extent allowed by law. If you attend this rally, be sure to take photos and send them to Natural News for publication.

If anyone attending the rally can bring an audio recorder, attempt to interview Boston Herald staffers and ask if they support government-run execution squads of so-called “anti-vaxxers.” If they answer yes, ask them if they plan to do the killing themselves, or if they want government to do the killing for them. Find out if they plan to use lethal injection, hanging, machetes or guns. After all, history has shown there are all sorts of ways for genocidal factions of society to run mass murder campaigns against the people they don’t like. We’re wondering which method the Boston Herald favors.

You might also ask them whether they think killing children with toxic vaccine ingredients is also ethically justifiable, since they’re also advocating the mass murder of naturopaths, scientists and journalists who oppose mercury in vaccines. Find out if there’s any other group they also think should be murdered, such as “climate denialists” or people who grow herbs. Maybe they hate “man boobs” and want to murder men with breasts.

You know, whenever I think Adams can't sink any lower or become any more ridiculous, he always proves me wrong. As much as I like to laugh at his ridiculousness in urging antivaxers to pretend they're Michael Moore or Geraldo Rivera asking "gotcha" questions, his threat to the journalists of the Boston Herald is anything but funny. For one thing, a lot more people work at a newspaper than just journalists, and only a relatively small number of people put together most editorial pages. Even fewer still actually write the editorials. Neither is this the least bit amusing:

The sheer cynicism is breathtaking. Here you have a group of people, nearly all white, latching on to one of the most shameful parts of American history, the lynchings of black people, mostly men, that took place over many decades after the Civil War and claiming to be on the side of the Somali immigrants, who are also black. The condescending racism is beyond belief. So is the obsessive use of hanging imagery, be it Ms. Taylor's use of an illustration of women being hung after the Salem witch trials or Adams' use of an old photo of the lynching of a black man to try to claim he's on the side of the Somalis, or the many photos of nooses obsessively included in posts and articles on various antivax blogs and websites. It's almost as though they really, really like (or are fascinated) by the imagery of hanging.

I also can't help but point out here that, first of all, the press is not attacking the Somalis. Racist xenophobes (but I repeat myself) are attacking them, using the measles outbreak as a convenient excuse and ignoring how it was American antivaxers who fed them misinformation that vaccines cause autism, who frightened the Somalis into not vaccinating. If there were no measles outbreak, the same people would just continuing to demonize the Somalis as a fertile recruiting ground for ISIS. Rather, most journalists in the mainstream press realize that the Somalis are victims of American antivaxers and, of course, the British fraud who inspired them, Andrew Wakefield, and that's at whom their ire is being directed, not the Somalis—and appropriately so. Again, the Somalis are the victims, and antivaxers are the perpetrators. Meanwhile, the public health officials trying to combat the antivaccine misinformation being spread by the antivaxers are the heros, and the journalists are documenting it all.

These are the reasons why I scoff when antivaxers claim not to be antivaccine. I mean, seriously. Think about it. Not only do they liken vaccination programs to all those horrible things I discussed above, but they think nothing of using obvious intimidation tactics to attempt to frighten critics who have the temerity to call them out into silence. I first noticed that 12 years ago when I was a new blogger and my true identity was actually not one of the worst-kept secrets on the Internet. Antivaxers and other cranks were obsessed with finding out who I was. That's because they have no science and therefore can't win when science is the basis of the discussion. Instead, they seek ways to attack their critics, either through ad hominems or through the threat of actual physical attacks (and, let's face it, that's the undertext of Adams' plans). Discovering who their critics are, digging for every bit of dirt they can on them, publicizing anything negative they can find, and harassing critics at their jobs or schools are the first preferred techniques of dealing with criticism, not the use of evidence, science, and reason to persuade. Adams' plan to dox employees of the Boston Herald and other provaccine advocates who criticize antivaxers is nothing new. It's how antivaxers operate. It's how they've always operated since I first discovered that there are people clueless enough to view vaccines as dangerous.

oracknows Wed, 05/17/2017 - 00:00

Categories

Social Sciences

Just when you thought Adams couldn't sink any lower, he goes out and proves everyone wrong in magnitudes greater than expected.
I certainly hope the Boston Herald takes the "protest" seriously enough to protect their employees from the doxxing and hate mail the antivaxxers would happily send to them....we all know the antivaxxers are so polite that way.
Of course, if the Herald does ask for police to monitor the protest, we can all bet on the fact that Adams will seize on that as preventing "freedom of speech" - only allowed when it's his, not anyone else's, by the way. It's OK to doxx anyone you disagree with, in his mind (and many antivaxxers), but heaven forbid anyone do it to them.

Doxxing per se is not illegal. But stalking and harassment are.

Adams is walking a fine line. He'd better watch his step, or the local prosecutors may indeed take an interest . . . just not the one he wants.

@Panacea: I know doxxing isn't illegal. But we all know that when the antivaxxers doxx someone, they don't leave it at that, they write to friends, neighbors, employers and threaten families. And since they aren't brave enough to put their names on the harassment, it's very difficult for law enforcement to manage.

I haven't listened yet, but I wonder if Ms. Taylor, talking about this yesterday, distanced herself from Mr. Adams' implied threats.
http://www.robertscottbell.com/show-archives/

Jaxen cites Anthony Mawson’s terrible study that was retracted from not just one, but two, bottom-feeding predatory pay-to-publish “open access” journals without mentioning the little bit about the retraction, and concludes that more fascism in the service of “forced vaccination” is on the way.

Weirdly, the fact that both surveys were retracted is evidence to the irrational worldview of anti-vaxxers that "we" are somehow frightened of this information and also feeds into their persecution complex. It is this persecution complex and irrationality, along with a healthy dose of cognitive dissonance that allows them to justify harassing their critics with the same methods they accuse their critics of employing.

The first study appears to be back on the OAT website...

@Science Mom: Nothing weird about it, it's how conspiracy theorists operate. The paper was published? Evidence of a conspiracy. The paper was retracted? Evidence that a conspiracy is suppressing the evidence. It made no difference to the anti-vax crew what happened to the Mawson et al. paper after it was submitted.

A minor point on the original post: Not only does the VAERS database overstate the incidence of vaccine injury (by not verifying the claimed injuries), but the National Database of Inpatient Stays for Children almost certainly understates the incidence of gun injuries to children. Assuming that the latter database is exactly what it says on the tin, it would exclude (1) children who died before being admitted to a hospital and (2) children whose injuries were not severe enough to merit hospitalization. The CDC is actually prohibited from investigating the incidence of gun injuries, because certain politicians who are in the pocket of the gun lobby don't want to find out the answer. And I have the impression that, among his many other proclivities, Mike Adams is a gun nut.

MI Dawn: yes, I get that. But Adams is effectively inciting the behavior. They don't have to track the doxxers. They can go to Adams. That's why I said he should watch his step.

The first study appears to be back on the OAT website…

At what ransom I wonder.

Re: Johnson's use of the VAERS information.

This is a continuing fetish of data abuse on the part of the anti-vaxxers. If I recall correctly, there are several warnings about the data collected by VAERS, explaining that it is unfiltered, unverified, and unreliable for anything other than possible more reliable investigations. One page even makes visitors acknowledge reading disclaimers before getting to the actual information. For any one with basic reading comprehension, this is about as close as a government agency is likely to get to shouting "Don't go data diving here for anything approaching reliable information!"

I think a phrase I learned in college back in the early 1960s says it all:

"L'hypocrisie est un hommage que le vice rend à la vertu."

"Hypocrisy is an homage that vice pays to virtue."

François de La Rochefoucauld
(September 15 1613 – March 17 1680)

For any one with basic reading comprehension, this is about as close as a government agency is likely to get to shouting “Don’t go data diving here for anything approaching reliable information!”

Of course, some people will still fall for the Schmuck Bait. Mr. Johnson, whose surname just happens to be a slang term for "schmuck", would be among them.

Not too long ago I ran across a comment (don't recall where) from someone who moaned about all that up-front effort required to get into VAERS and how it seemed like a deliberate attempt to keep people out - then proceeded to cite VAERS entries in a manner warned against.

Bring your cameras to the protest! Natural News plans to publish photos of Boston Herald staff members walking to and from the building, their vehicle license plate numbers and other details

Does anyone know the car registrations of Adams, Taylor &Co?
How delicious if those who worked at the Herald drove in tomorrow with a mock up of Adams' and Taylor's numberplates on their cars.

all manner of antivaxers liken the vaccination program to rape, the Holocaust, Nazis, the Titanic, the Oklahoma City bombing, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, and a tsunami

From the Department of Idle Curiosity, it turns out that the first appearance of this one at AoA that G—le coughs up is from February 2008.

Eric,

Oh yes, Mikey makes sure to mention at any opportunity that's he's always armed. When the "holistic doctors are being murdered" conspiracy reared its ugly head, he pointed out that anyone who tried that on him would face a barrage of bullets.

He's also said that had he been in the audience in the Colorado movie theatre during the "Batman" shootings he would have taken down the shooter with his firearms prowess.

I see what you're trying to do here, but using an actual Holocaust photo and one depicting a real lynching? in very, VERY poor taste. Shame on you.

anyone who tried that on him would face a barrage of bullets

Not that we needed any more evidence that Adams is delusional, but this only works if he is able to draw his gun and shoot it before the "bad guy" perforates him. Which, if said "bad guy" were intent on harming Adams, would not be the case.

he would have taken down the shooter with his firearms prowess

If I ever became world dictator, one of my actions would be to take guns away from idiots like this. Because that is one heck of a dangerous fantasy. Suppose you are a "good guy with a gun" in a situation where a "bad guy with a gun" starts shooting, and somebody else starts shooting back. Or suppose you are a police officer arriving on the scene where this scenario is taking place. Which shooter is the bad guy? My guess is that if I were in that scenario, I would have a 50-50 chance of guessing wrong, and I suspect the same is true for almost all civilians and many cops. (Not to mention the risk of hitting an innocent bystander, as I am under no illusions about my marksmanship in this scenario.) However, I don't suffer from Dunning-Kruger syndrome, at least on the subject of firearms. Far too many gun nuts do. The Second Amendment does specify that the militia should be "well-regulated".

@Melissa: So, Orac using public photos to demonstrate the rhetoric of the antivaxxers (because they have compared giving vaccines to the Holocaust, and rape, etc, as noted above) is horrible and very poor taste? What do you have to say to the AV'ers who use the language? Who threaten to "meet you at work and blow your head off" or other threats? I suppose those are free speech and OK, right?

Or would you have also condemned the infamous Thanksgiving picture that AOA posted a few years ago?

Somehow, I don't quite get Melissa's outrage over the use of a Holocaust-era photo (which appears to show prisoners being liberated from Auschwitz) to illustrate the profound cluelessness and insulting imagery to which antivaxers stoop when they invoke the Holocaust for their purpose.

And perhaps she should direct the rest of her ire at Mike Adams (whose lynching photo was reproduced here).

Somehow, I don’t quite get Melissa’s outrage over the use of a Holocaust-era photo (which appears to show prisoners being liberated from a camp) to illustrate the profound cluelessness and insulting imagery to which antivaxers stoop when they invoke the Holocaust for their purpose.

And perhaps she should direct her ire over the lynching photo of the person who first posted it (not Orac).

I don't get it either. Now, I did think about whether to reproduce the photo used by Mike Adams, but in the end I thought that illustrating just how vile Adams' imagery is outweighed the possibility that some might be offended. However, regarding the Auschwitz picture, I am at a loss. I've written about the use of Holocaust analogies by historically ignorant antivaxers more times than I can remember, and I frequently illustrate such posts with a Holocaust-related photo, like the train line to Auschwitz, the Auschwitz gate shown in the photo I picked for this post, photos of the ruins of the krema (crematoria) or of the gas chambers, or photos of Hitler or marching Nazis. I've never gotten a complaint on that basis. Methinks there's a bit too much sensitivity here.

For one thing, a lot more people work at a newspaper than just journalists

Carefully disguised in yellow pants, no doubt.

there are several warnings about the data collected by VAERS, explaining that it is unfiltered, unverified, and unreliable for anything other than possible more reliable investigations. One page even makes visitors acknowledge reading disclaimers before getting to the actual information

That is why NVIC offer their own mirror of the database for people who don't want to know about the disclaimers.
http://www.medalerts.org/

@Eric Lund #28, I actually know my level of proficiency with firearms, courtesy of training and experience provided by the US taxpayer.
One thing that has awakened me in a cold sweat, was a nightmare of being in a crowd while a shootout began.

As for the movie theater shooting, I know what I'd do in that situation as well - hide with pride. The notion of being in a large, dark theater and trading shots with someone, all in the midst of a panic ridden crowd is something that I'd heartily recommend the one suggesting said notion have his or her head examined for emptiness.*

*Many years ago, I did have a concealed carry permit. One evening, while having to clean the pistol, yet again, of all of the gunk accumulated from carrying it, I pondered how sporting a criminal would have to be for me to avail myself of that weapon.
"Oh, excuse me, Mr Criminal. I have a firearm as well, can you hold on a second while I get mine out and we're even?"
Yeah.
Into the safe it went and stayed.

As for doxxing, been there, done that, got the "I've been doxxed" tee shirt. One, being exceptionally enterprising, both doxxing me and threatening to come to my home, murder my family, rape my wife, then murder me. It didn't enter his equation that I'd not agree to observe passively.
Which, I disabused him of, quite graphically and mentioning that I'd only use a firearm against an invader of my home if I were feeling charitable - which would be highly unlikely, but that I am proficient with edged weapons, of which I have aplenty.
Which is quite true, I use my old bayonets and fighting knives that I still retain (I gave most of them away when I retired) for yard work. That'll teach those pesky dandelions!

A little over ten years ago a young man in the army killed in the middle east, he was from a small town (about) in the county I worked in.

That Baptist church from the mid-west threaten to protest at the burial (they were banned from entering the cemetery).

I knew the volunteer fire chief and we hatched a plan to take care of their protest. We would start a small fire between the protesters and the burial. No direct violence would have done to the protesters, they just by chance be in the wrong place at the right time.

The volunteer fire department would be called out to put the fire. They would have unfortunately sprayed the protesters with lots of water. It was winter time and the temp was hovering around 10F. Unfortunately the protestors didn't show up.

I think it would be great fun to do something like this to these protesters. Unfortunately, it is a lot warmer Boston right now than it was in the small town I was talking about.

Wzrd1,

I showing my Claymore off the other day and it is still by my chair.

I still remember the line from one of Crocodile Dundee movies: you can that a knife.

@Rich Bly,
"They can take our lives, but they can never take our -" Zzzzzt! "light fixture..."

Yeah, I know. Not in the house.

Does anyone know the car registrations of Adams, Taylor &Co?

One could always ask.

"Hate speech and harassment (which is the personal, rather than group-focused, cousin of hate speech) impose costs on others for speaking. In so doing, they limit speech to those most able to pay those costs. This is the simple secret behind harassment campaigns, especially ones on the Internet. It’s also why “real name” policies have no effect on abuse: the offenders generally get social credit in their communities for doing so. (There are plenty of communities in which being an asshole not only costs you nothing, it’s a way to show off. Vide Trump.)"

https://extranewsfeed.com/free-speech-and-hate-speech-17a1eaf1e78

Orac@23
The gnat did it before Adams.Probably where Mikey got the idea of using a photo like that.

That Baptist church from the mid-west threaten to protest at the burial

If you are referring to the group I think you are referring to, then they have been in my neck of the woods at least a couple of times. The first time, almost 20 years ago now, was after a nearby high school's senior class named a lesbian couple as "class sweethearts". Apparently things were so hunky-dory in their back yard that they could protest at a high school some 2000 km away. They were mostly ignored at the time. But they were not, at least at the time, gun nuts.

That group eventually forced out their (since-deceased) leader because he wasn't extreme enough for them.

At present the only violence from the anti-vaxers is in the rhetoric, and attacks on journalists are potential. When this topic is raised here, I always wonder why the actual violence and real attacks on health care providers are so easily ignored when they are directed against abortion providers. I can only suppose that you don't want to open this particular Pandora' box, but it seems odd to be so concerned about potential violence when members of your profession are frequently threatened and sometimes killed, while the conservative side of the political spectrum encourages the violence.

Sigh. This comment is basically a "Why don't you blog about what I think you should blog about?" comment. Regular readers know that I never take kindly to such comments.

Cloudskimmer @34: We tend to stick to vax/anti-vax topics here, so a more apt comparison might be the groups internationally who specifically target vaccine workers in places like Pakistan.

Thankfully here it is still just rhetoric, whereas there it is actual killings.

I also recall several choice words towards anti-abortion groups on this blog, even without articles directly talking about the murder of abortion providers.

If one thinks anti-vaccine propaganda is just dangerous for the unvaccinated children, think again.
In August last year a lady who blamed her childs autism on vaccinations, stabbed a pediatrician in the head. The pediatrician survived, but is unable to work.
Alas I can't find anything about this in English, so I just post the Dutch link. Perhaps Google translate can help.
http://nos.nl/artikel/2174794-vier-jaar-cel-en-tbs-voor-insteken-op-kin…

The annals of "I'm not antivaccine," part 24: Antivaxers threaten to dox Boston Herald employees over the newspaper's use of imagery much less offensive than what antivaxers use on a daily basis

oracknows — Tue, 16 May 2017 04:00:08 +0000

The annals of "I'm not antivaccine," part 24: Antivaxers threaten to dox Boston Herald employees over the newspaper's use of imagery much less offensive than what antivaxers use on a daily basis

Over the last few years, I've been doing a recurring series that I like to refer to as The Annals of "I'm not antivaccine." Amazingly, it's already up to part 23. It's a series based on an oft-repeated antivaccine claim that is either a like or a delusion (sometimes both), namely the claim made by antivaccine activists ranging from Jenny McCarthy to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the latter of whom is best known for making such claims after likening "vaccine-induced autism" to the Holocaust. (Indeed, RFK, Jr. takes denial to a ridiculous extreme by proclaiming himself not just "pro-vaccine" but "fiercely pro-vaccine.") Almost no matter who the antivaxer is, the refrain is the same: I'm not antivaccine. At the same time, they liken vaccination policy to Nazis, the Holocaust (with themselves as the Jews), waterboarding, and, most despicably, rape. You get the idea. Basically, antivaxers proclaim themselves as being "not antivaccine" but rather vaccine safety activists, even as they liken the vaccine program to all manner of atrocities and crimes like rape.

I was reminded of this by an article that appeared in the Boston Herald last week. More specifically, it was the reaction on the part of antivaxers to a bit of hyperbole that I found quite telling. Basically, it was an editorial, entitled Preying on parents’ fear, pointing out how antivaxers preyed on the Somali immigrant community in Minnesota. It's a story I've discussed several times now, even as recently as just last week. In brief, thirteen years ago ,the Somalis in Minnesota vaccinated their children at a rate even higher than native-born Americans living in the same area. Then, about a decade ago stories were published in the media about an "autism" cluster in the Somali community. Whether or not it was real was not known at the time. (Subsequent studies have shown no more Somali children being diagnosed with autism than American children living in the same area.) Antivaxers, however, are nothing, if not certain, and they were certain that the cluster must be real and that vaccines done it.

As the Boston Herald put it:

Skepticism about vaccines within Minnesota’s Somali community goes back a decade, the Post reported, after parents raised concern about possible higher rates of autism among their children (research later indicated that wasn’t the case).

But it seems that was all the truthers needed to hear. When Somali parents sought answers to explain autism, anti-vaccine activists were delighted to fill in the information gap. The disgraced British doctor who once reported a link between vaccines and autism — which was deemed fraudulent and cost him his medical license — has met with families, the Post reported. Even amid this latest outbreak, anti-vaccine groups have fanned the flames, making it hard for public health officials and doctors to be heard above the noise.

These are the facts: Vaccines don’t cause autism. Measles can kill. And lying to vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children ought to be a hanging offense.

I groaned and immediately really wished that the editors had chosen a different idiom to express their outrage. It should go without saying that I don't approve of calls for violence and never make them, but it won't. Any antivaxer who reads this will try to suck me into the maw of accusations being made by antivaxers now. I also didn't think that the editors of the Boston Herald were actually calling for antivaxers to be hanged. After all, I know that the term "hanging offense" is an idiom, intentional hyperbole used to make a point. You know that it's an idiom, intentional hyperbole used to make a point. I daresay that even antivaxers know it's intentional hyperbole used to make a point. The reaction was very much predictable, incredibly disingenuous, and utterly hypocritical, given the rhetoric routinely used by antivaxers. But, then, you knew that, didn't you? No, no one seriously believes that the Boston Herald is calling for the deaths of antivaxers, least of all I and certainly not the antivaxers piling on, but I knew that antivaxers, despite their history of even worse language, would seize upon this bit of verbiage as a pretext to lose their friggin' minds. Same as it ever was.

For instance, the wandering band of merry antivaxers over at the antivaccine crank blog Age of Autism were really impressed with an "open letter" written by James Lyons-Weiler. After a rant about how, even though he's vaccinated his children and none of them has autism, he stands "with the parents who call for warnings against the current vaccine schedule, and by those who call for spreading them out, and for those who call for safer vaccines without neurotoxins like mercury, and aluminum" because he's "read the REST of the science," over 2,000 studies on autism. Never mind how ridiculous his claim is. If it takes an hour to read and digest each study and Lyons-Weiler spent 16 hours a day every day reading, it would have taken him 125 days to get through that many studies. Even if it only took a half-hour per study, it would still would have taken almost 63 days. Does anyone think that either Lyons-Weiler spent between 63 and 125 days doing nothing but reading studies or that he's so brilliant that he can digest a complex scientific study in much less than a half hour?

He also goes where antivaxers have been going over this editorial since it was published. But first he prefaces his deep dive down that rabbit hole with this:

The autism parents rank among the best people in the world to me. They don’t need protection from free speech about vaccine risk. Neither do the Somali parents. These parents are WARRIORS. They are smart, informed, educated, logical, and reasonable.

Unlike you, Rachell, they care. They are good people, taking the time to educate Somalis and other African Americans that they might be able to protect their kids from harm with vitamins.

Lyons-Weiler owes me a new keyboard, as I spit up my iced tea upon reading that. Let's just say that the antivaxers who have poisoned the minds of a vulnerable population against vaccines, leading to this year's growing measles outbreak among the Minnesota Somalis are anything but "informed," logical or reasonable.

Be that as it may:

Parents of children with vaccine injury who speak out have one and only one agenda.

To protect other peoples’ kids.

And each one of them, I’m sure, would line up at your gallows to be the first martyr in the war for our children’s brains, and our minds.

But, if you want to pick the trees, or construct the gallows, Rakkell, we won’t stop you.

Hang us, Raqueel. Hang us all.

One question.

Whatever will you do with all the bodies?

While you’re calling for death squads, the rest of us peaceable, civilized folks are discussing health directions in neurodevelopmental disorders, the future of immunity, and discussing vaccine safety science and science integrity and the size of the market for vaccine safety screening biomarkers.

Oh, and we’re all subscribing to the Boston Globe. Because they don’t condone hate speech.

Notice how hyperbole about "hanging offense" morphs into "calling for death squads." Also notice how it's turned into "hate speech." Not surprisingly, after recounting a number of antivaccine tropes, Kim Stagliano dons the mantle of victimhood and accuses The Boston Herald of calling for violence against antivaxers:

Really, this is just startling coming from Boston. Home of the Tea Party and Freedom Train. Boston. Massachusetts. Liberal to the core in so many ways. Protectors of the rights of everyone - except us. And calling for violence against families who choose to alter the CDC vaccine schedule.

Violence.

Isn't it amazing how much can be read into a two word phrase? Antivaxers were just getting warmed up, though. If regular, run-of-the-mill antivaxers ramp up the crazy to 11, there's only one man who can double it to 22, cranking it up beyond the capacity of any crazy meter to tolerate. I'll give you two guesses who that man is. Oh, never mind. Regular readers know of whom I speak: Mike Adams, a.k.a. The Health Ranger, or, as most skeptics call him, The Health Danger. It didn't take him long at all to issue an "emergency action alert":

Earlier this week, the Boston Herald openly published an editorial representing the views of its entire editorial staff, essentially calling for government-run execution squads to mass murder scientists, journalists and naturopathic physicians who oppose mercury in vaccines. According to the Boston Herald, all these people should be “hanged to death” for daring to question the quack science cult of vaccine fundamentalism.

This was not an April Fools’ joke by the Boston Herald. The newspaper, which has now revealed itself to be a domestic terrorism group, deliberately intends to see people like myself murdered by the government in order to appease their pharmaceutical interests.

Now wait. A flippant bit of hyperbole about how spreading antivaccine misinformation among a vulnerable population should be a "hanging offense" has morphed even more. Now it's "calling for government-run execution squads to mass murder scientists, journalists and naturopathic physicians who oppose mercury in vaccines." Of course, the wag in me can't help but point out that the antivaccine misinformation spread among the Somalis was all Andrew Wakefield's discredited ideas, and those were about the MMR vaccine, which never contained thimerosal and therefore never contained mercury. Yes, it's a bit of pedantry, but it's a fun and necessary bit of pedantry that reveals just how far beyond reality Mike Adams will go to wind up his base:

The Boston Herald justifies this call for mass murder — a felony crime under U.S. law — by claiming that because a few dozen children in Minnesota caught the measles — a common infection similar to chicken pox — and that the millions of Americans who oppose government-enforced vaccine violence should all be mass slaughtered in a Holocaust-level execution event to somehow make up for it.

I have already begun the process of filing criminal complaints with the FBI and the Boston Police, but we also need bloggers, journalists, scientists and naturopaths in the state of Massachusetts who can file local complaints with law enforcement to investigate and potentially prosecute these Boston Herald domestic terrorists who are posing as journalists.

Because the Boston Police and the FBI don't have better things to do than to deal with a flood of complaints from a bunch of cranks about a newspaper exercising its right to free speech under the First Amendment. Of course, Adams tried the same thing with me, claiming that he reported me to the FBI for colluding with Dr. Farid Fata, the evil oncologist who bilked Medicaid and Medicare for tens of millions of dollars for giving patients chemotherapy they didn't need. Over a year later, let's just say I haven't been arrested or even questioned yet.

Hilariously (to reasonable people), Adams maintains his utter lack of self-awareness, as he calls for a protest outside the Boston Herald:

Notably, no one in the Washington Post, New York Times or CNN has denounced the Boston Herald’s call for the murder of vaccine skeptics. This is very nearly an implied endorsement of the murder, of course, which is consistent with the deranged, violent tendencies of the vaccine-collaborating (and pharma-influenced) media that continues to deny the existence of the Vaccine Holocaust.

Rally this Thursday in front of the Boston Herald

Now, Health Choice Massachusetts has announced a rally to take place at the steps of the Boston Herald this Thursday, May 18th, at 11:00 am.

Click here for the Health Choice Massachusetts Facebook page which contains details of the rally. So far, 110 people say they are interested in attending the rally. This number will no doubt grow between now and Thursday.

Hmmm. When I checked the page last night, there were 117 listed as "interested," but only 17 saying they'll attend.

Now here's where Adams gets vile, even for him:

What you might consider doing, however, is staging a MOCK HANGING of an “anti-vaxxer” who happens to be African American or another minority, in order to point out the inexcusable, anti-humanitarian stance of the Boston Herald and how such ignorance and violence against men and women has been carried out in the past to silence enemies of the establishment. Seriously: If you want to make some news, theatrically stage the Boston Herald’s proposed LYNCHING of an African-American “anti-vaxxer” in front of their offices to demonstrate the truth about how vaccines are violence against African-Americans. It’s true: CDC scientist Dr. William Thompson is on the record, testifying about the CDC cover-up of how vaccines disproportionately harm young African-American boys with an increased risk of autism.

No, the "CDC whistleblower" William Thompson is on the record saying no such thing. I'm torn, though. Half of me would almost like to see the spectacle of a bunch of white people (and, make no mistake, it's likely that any antivaxers who show up to this "protest" will be overwhelmingly white) staging a mock lynching of a black person, regardless of the reason. They're so clueless that they really don't know just how horrible the optics would be if they were to do that. The other half of me doesn't want to see such a shameful and hateful spectacle in which antivaxers pervert a horrific chapter in American history when lynchings of black people were commonplace to promote their own twisted cause. Yes, the latter half definitely wins this time.

Now here's where Adams' hypocrisy shows:

Bring your cameras to the protest! Natural News plans to publish photos of Boston Herald staff members walking to and from the building, their vehicle license plate numbers and other details, to the extent allowed by law. If you attend this rally, be sure to take photos and send them to Natural News for publication.

Yes, this is exactly what it sounds like: Intimidation and threats against people working for the Boston Herald. Where the Boston Herald only used a flippant, ill-advised idiom, Mike Adams is actually urging his readers to send him photos of Boston Herald employees so that he can publish them on his website, as well as license plate numbers and other identifying details. The only reason for being interested in license plate numbers is to allow Adams' readers to discover names and home addresses. Yes, Adams urges nonviolence, but he does so in a way that practically says the opposite:

Do not assault or attempt to intimidate Boston Herald staff members. Do not bring weapons like the insane Leftists at UC Berkeley. Keep your protest peaceful and non-violent.

Of course, Adams has a history of doing this very sort of thing, publishing an enemies list, but trying to leave just enough plausible deniability that he's trying to intimidate his enemies to silence. Does anyone remember the website Monsanto Collaborators? Basically, it was a website almost certainly created by Mike Adams (although he later called the site a "false flag" operation and claimed he had nothing to do with it). Adams is no slouch with violent imagery, either, being particularly prone to likening scientists to Nazis and blaming them for basically every evil in the world, including the Holocaust. Meanwhile, Elissa Meininger is publishing with a straight face two articles asking Vaccines – Are They the New “Crimes Against Humanity?” (Part 1) and Vaccines – Are They the New “Crimes Against Humanity?” (Part 2).

So let me get this straight. Antivaxers aren't "antivaccine," but they liken vaccine policy to the Holocaust, rape, torture, Nazi medical experiments, Sauron, sex trafficking, the Titanic, and more. They can unironically use violent imagery that implies that portrays anyone seeking to vaccinate one's child as a deadly threat against whom lethal force is justified (and even glorified in fantasy). All the while, they can claim they're "not antivaccine" and justify their rhetoric as being hyperbole. Yet, if a pro-vaccine advocate's speech or writing isn't perfectly genteel, suddenly antivaxers become the special snowflakes they accuse "pro-vaxers" of being. It's hypocritical and disingenuous as hell, but it's how antivaxers operate.

I'd take the outrage (which is actually faux outrage) of antivaxers over this editorial somewhat more seriously if they actually reined in their own violent imagery describing dark fantasies of persecution in which the CDC and pro-vaccine advocates finally face bloody justice when the antivaxers "win." This will, of course, never happen, because to antivaxers' violent imagery "is for me, not for thee." They can publicly indulge in dark fantasies of shooting health officials trying to vaccinate their children and that's OK, but should a pro-vaccine advocate make an ill-advised crack about a "hanging offense" suddenly it's a "hate crime."

ADDENDUM: Ginger Taylor has finally weighed in, and, as usual when she does, hilarity ensues. The lack of self-awareness is strong in this one, as she publishes an e-mail exchange between Boston Herald editor Rachelle Cohen and an antivaxer. Cohen, not surprisingly, has gotten a lot of hate mail, including (predictably, given her name) antisemitic hate mail, complete with a large volume of antisemitic calls and e-mails, leading her to observe drolly, "Discussions that begin with how sorry folks are I'm not headed for 'the ovens' [are] not likely to be fruitful."

Indeed.

It amuses me to no end how antivaxers so gleefully make my points for me. Ginger basically has to beg her readers to knock it off with violent imagery far worse than the poorly chosen quip about a "hanging" offense that she now finds oh-so-offensive, coupled with Nazi level antisemitism. Hilarity indeed. I'd almost feel sorry for Ms. Taylor, but she brings it on herself—with gusto—and her Dunning-Kruger arrogance of ignorance is off the charts.

ADDENDUM #2: The Massachusetts Attorney General has rebuffed Mike Adams complaint against the Boston Herald. This can only mean one thing: Lulz galore, except that it's too serious:

Following the Boston Herald’s call for anti-vaxxers to be “hanged to death”, Natural News issued an urgent action item for readers and fans to report the Boston Herald to law enforcement authorities. A wave of complaints hit the Boston FBI, Boston Police and the Massachusetts Attorney General, requesting criminal investigations into the Boston Herald for its unabashed call for anti-vaxxers to be executed in the same way black slaves were once lynched in America.

In response, as shown in the letter below, the Massachusetts Attorney General has declared it will not investigate the matter.

Of course, if you or I openly declared we were going to murder a journalist who worked at the Boston Herald, the investigation would be swift and highly publicized, but when the Boston Herald calls for the murder of people like us, the state government says that’s not worth investigating, and no other mainstream media outlet covers the story.

In other words, the Massachusetts government has just told anti-vaxxers that you must now take up your own self-defense against journo-terrorists, since the “authorities” in government refuse to apply the law to those who work at the Boston Herald. Your lives are now in danger. You are being targeted by the Boston Herald and any number of psychopaths who may be motivated by the Herald’s call for mass murder. The government has now declared it will do nothing to stop the calls for murder by “journalists” as long as they are targeting people who oppose toxic vaccine ingredients.

It’s time to start publishing the home addresses of journo-terrorists who escalate violence against concerned parents and independent scientists

This all explains why I plan to publish the home addresses of the journo-terrorists working at the Boston Herald, in order to warn local Bostonians that they might be living next to murderous, sociopathic mental health miscreants who are a danger to society. Since the Massachusetts government refuses to take any action to protect the public from these dangerous psychopaths, it’s obvious that we must take action to protect ourselves. The right to self-defense, after all, is one of the most sacred rights we possess.

Our non-profit division is also launching the public education site VaccineHolocaust.org where journo-terrorists who deny that vaccines harm children will be named and shamed, providing a permanent record of their crimes against children and humanity.

So let's see. Editors at the Boston Herald use an ill-advised idiom to express anger at the evil done by antivaxers who misinformed the Somalis in Minnesota that the MMR vaccine causes autism. In response, antivaxers threaten to publish personal information about Boston Herald employees on NaturalNews in order to intimidate journalists to silence and allow antivaxers to find them, either to harass them or attack them. This is particularly hypocritical given how Adams has done everything he can to make himself hard to locate. One can only imagine how he'd react if someone managed to find his home address and cell phone number and publish it. I can't help but say again: Through their actions, antivaxers make my point for me better than I ever could.

oracknows Tue, 05/16/2017 - 00:00

Tags

Antivaccine nonsense

complementary and alternative medicine

medicine

Pseudoscience

Quackery

Skepticism/Critical Thinking

complementary and alternative medicine

medicine

Categories

Social Sciences

While the antivax tu quoque machinery rushes into high gear over this, they might realize that the Herald is a tabloid newspaper prone to sensationalism. Beyond editorials, the paper is also known for its, um, sensitive headlines in response to world events:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/a8/eb/16/a8eb1604433a72b77430…

I think that one may be in part a tribute to the classic N.Y. Daily News headline about the execution of Ruth Snyder.

https://thepowerofthefrontcover.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/daily_news_…

Gotta love how the Herald makes a dumb editorial comment that no one otherwise agreeing with the editorial would take seriously, while antivaxers have said (and threatened) much worse in all earnestness.

Living at Fort Lewis WA where my father was a young M.D. physician, I caught the mumps and measles as a child -- no big deal. Now in my dotage I am surprised when outbreaks of the mumps sweep periodically through the campus of my University of Washington alma mater -- apparently because the students were not vaccinated in childhood. Although I avoid flu vaccinations out of personal preference, my important work at http://www.reddit.com/r/mentifex on artificial intelligence makes me glad to have been vaccinated against poliomyelitis and smallpox and the other serious diseases that could have cut short my life or health. (I last saw a doctor over thirty years ago, so I am being admittedly foolhardy.)

I expect the FBI gets a lot of these kind of baseless letters. I wonder what their procedure on that is.

I wish the Boston Herald hadn't used that language. But thanks for calling out the hypocrisy of the cries of outrage from a movement that has no hesitation using violent rhetoric.

Yeah, whoever wrote the editorial probably thought it was an appropriate idiom to communicate the harm antivaxers are doing, but in reality, even though it is obvious that no one is seriously calling for hanging antivaxers promoting misinformation among the Somalis, using such an idiom provided disingenuous and hypocritical twits like Mike Adams and the crew at AoA to jump all over this.

I guess they need to grab at whatever they can to mobilize their group and try to deflect the fact that the measles outbreak their movement directly caused is putting kids in the hospital.

The hypocrisy is especially obvious when some of them, thinking they're being clever, I'm sure, try to apply the idea in reverse to the people they hate, like CDC officials.

Wow, the hypocrisy.

How many times has AoA called for the death or harm to people like Dorit, Dr. Offit & others?

"Hanging offense" may be hyperbole, but it also has a historical basis. English law, on which US law is based, once provided a mandatory death penalty for the theft of goods worth more than 12 (pre-decimal) pence. The phrase was also used in the Old West, where it had an association with vigilante justice--ironically, the sort of justice Adams is advocating by urging the doxxing of Boston Herald employees, most of whom had nothing whatsoever to do with the writing of that editorial.

FWIW, the Boston Herald tends to be politically well to the right of the Boston Globe, which is considered the mainstream newspaper for points east of the Connecticut River.

Well, now I know why Del BigTurd had some webinar on whether AVers should be hanged. I just couldn't bring myself to click on his link (nor post it here, either) because I can't endure any more neuronal apoptosis from watching AVers.

@ Dorit

I'm not a lawyer; but wonder if as a result of not vaccinating a child, that child dies or develops a serious disability, e.g. blindness, from the vaccine-preventable disease, and the parents can make a case that their choice to not vaccinate was mainly made based on what was told them by antivaccinationists, could they sue the antivaccinationists and would they have a reasonable probability of winning the lawsuit?

While I understand that "hanging offense" does not mean actual hanging and I have been against the death penalty since pre-teen years, I wonder if giving clearly unscientific advise should have some criminal penalty. As an analogy, imagine a parent fails to put an infant in a car seat and the car is struck by a drunken driver. Obviously, the drunken driver is the proximate cause of any injury or death to the infant; but by not placing the child in a secure car seat, would the parent have, say, committed some form of criminal negligence and, if so, could that be applied to advice from antivaccinationists?

I haven't found any applicable criminal laws in Minnesota - the child endangerment laws are specific to people responsible for the child. doesn't mean there aren't any, just that I don't know what they would be. Nor what the federal criminal statutes applicable would be - criminal law really isn't my area.

In both cars, an issue here is that the parents chose who to listen to.

I think a tort suit is possible, though not easy. You can apply this discussion here even more strongly. http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/vaxxed-misinform…

Note addendum. :-)

Ginger is flinging about a whole bunch of insanity in that piece.

If you took the Herald editorial at face value, they're advocating a law providing for the death penalty for harming children through antivax deception. Somehow Taylor gets from that a call to lynch, torture and assassinate "autism moms".

These people are well beyond bats in the belfry. They've got a whole Carlsbad Caverns full of creatures flitting around up there.

I'll add my voice in to those saying the Herald's choice of words were inappropriate.

But the reaction to them is just off the deep end.

I did note that in Ginger's response, one of the emails sent to Ms. Cohen, in between a series of vile statements, referenced the incompetent study recently dissected here.

@ Dorit #2: I imagine the FBI spends very little money on toilet paper.

@ Joel #8: IANAL either, but I imagine such a suit would have a very difficult time succeeding because of First Amendment considerations. Spreading anti vax misinformation is not like yelling fire in a crowded theater. Caveat emptor applies; such parents also have access to correct information, and are therefore responsible for their own choices in what to believe.

The first amendment is not absolute. I address one way to deal
With it in my post above - highlighting that false statements of fact are less protected than other statements. Dr. Offit, whonis also not a lawyer but is right on this, addressed another line of argument here: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/05/13/did-anti-vaxxers-spark…

@ Dorit

Though I realize it is not the same, during the 1950s the tobacco industry criticized studies finding association of smoking and disease; but the industry also claimed they wanted to get at the truth and they funded their own studies, some extremely well-done. Their studies confirmed the association of smoking and disease; but they listed as the Principle Investigator one of their lawyers and because of "privilege" suppressed the studies. Of course, the lawyer wasn't the real PI. So, by promising to get at the truth, then intentionally suppressing it, since this led to 10s of thousands of unnecessary deaths and disability, e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, would there have been any legal grounds to criminally prosecute them?

As it is, the tobacco industry paid billions of dollars in lawsuits; but NEVER close to enough to hurt their bottom line and the immense harm they had caused and because many STATES became dependent on these monies in order to reduce taxes, the tobacco industry has been able to keep in business.

Antivaccinationist webpages often intentionally allow only one side to the argument. On numerous occasions I have submitted a comment that was not posted, e.g. one article claimed there had never been a single double-blinded randomized clinical trial of vaccines. My comment described the Salk polio trial of 1954-55, gave URLs and said I could supply many more examples. It was NOT posted. Though not the same as the suppression of studies by the tobacco industry, could this in some way be legally considered intentionally supplying misinformation? Especially when several of the antivaccinationist websites claim they just want to find the truth.

You would have to point to a specific offense for criminal prosecution - and that would be hard, though not impossible, I think.

I agree that torts is a more promising route, though even that's not without its difficulties (again, see above).

Discussions that begin with how sorry folks are I’m not headed for the ovens’ are not likely to be fruitful.

A nice bit of understatement from Ms. Cohen, which shows the hypocrisy of the anti-vaxer's rhetoric. There is no way to have a rational discussion with somebody like that.

Also, given that anti-vaxers have routinely accused their critics of having Nazi tendencies, I need to get a new irony meter. The one that I was using just exploded.

I haven’t found any applicable criminal laws in Minnesota

IANAL, but I would think that if there's anything actionable here, it would be in civil rather than criminal court. Which is, in the end, how the tobacco companies were forced to cough up (so to speak) the settlements in those cases.

I clearly remember that the use of violent and disrespectful communication was frowned upon in kindergarten.

It's true, the most important lessons we learn are taught in kindergarten.

@ Orac,

Did you practice respectful insolence in kindergarten and were you ever sent to the principle's office?

The standard of proof is different in civil court. In criminal cases you must prove your case beyond a reasonable doubt. That's important when you're talking about a verdict that's likely to result in one losing their liberty.

In civil court it's the preponderance of evidence or more likely than not (Dorit please correct me if I'm getting this wrong).

Dorit made some great points, but civil litigation takes years, and often settles out of court with no admission of wrong doing. The parents might get some financial compensation, but unless they really get nailed for a big judgement, I question how much good it will really do.

Ironic that individuals who claim a severe vaccine reaction can file with the NVICP with no "out of pocket" expenses, while those who's children die or are crippled from Vaccine Preventable diseases are instead left with nothing but filing long-shot Civil Litigation.

Spreading anti vax misinformation is not like yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Please, just let it die.

"The observation that some speech is outside the First Amendment is true but irrelevant and unpersuasive absent specific explanations of how particular established exceptions apply to particular speech. The 'you can't shout fire in a crowded theater' bit is a reference to a rhetorical flourish in a subsequently overturned case that means absolutely nothing."

I'll defer to Popehat on criminal law, but he's wrong on torts. You can sue in torts based on speech that causes harm. In fact, there are several lines of cases that do just that.

Well, he wasn't actually talking about torts, so saying "he's wrong" is inaccurate. You can sue for certain kinds of speech in torts. It depends on the specifics.

-btw-
IIRC, Lyons-Wheeler showed up at RI a while back prior to his stint at AoA.

Lulz is correct.

Srsly, the exaggeration about time spent 'studying' vaccines ( 2000 studies) is similar to the anti-vax standard of studying "14 ( 0r 15) thousand hours" which I've heard from several of the usual suspects.
If you did it full time- 8 hours a weekday- all year- it would still take QUITE a while. And don't these people work and clean their houses?

You can sue for certain kinds of speech in torts. It depends on the specifics.

I know what you're saying; Ken White uses more nuance here, which item I'll quote for those who might not go read the SR entry right away:

"[I]n 1964, faced with an Alabama defamation judgment against the New York Times for running an advertisement about abuse of civil rights protesters by local officials, the Supreme Court noted that the First Amendment obviously applies to private civil actions that employ state power. 'The test is not the form in which state power has been applied but, whatever the form, whether such power has, in fact, been exercised.' Because civil lawsuits aimed at speech invoke state power to attack speech, they are limited by the First Amendment. That doesn't mean that all civil lawsuits attacking speech are absolutely barred. It means that First Amendment analysis applies to them, and may or may not provide a defense to them.

"If you think about it even a little, this is the only sensible interpretation. Under a contrary interpretation, a state could pass a law saying that private parties could sue you for offending them, or annoying them, or for expressing certain political views the state disfavors. People could then use the coercive power of the courts to sue you based on those laws."

From the caption to the photograph that accompanies Orac's post: "I particularly like how he has an anatomy bust in the background. I've never seen such a thing in an actual functioning lab"

I was struck by what looks like a thermos parked on the bench to Adams' right (along with headphones and books). Having/enjoying your drink on a lab bench right next to test equipment does not strike me as desirable. What would an accreditation agency say?

I find it ironic that while the anti-vaxers have their drawers in an uproar over the term "hanging offense", they actually kept MN DOH employees away from a meeting of Wakefield and the Somali community with the use of armed guards!

While I have no problem with security, and while I think Wakefield probably does need a security guard, to use guns to suppress free speech is abhorrent.

Actually, I do believe Lyons-Weiler did read all those studies because I have his book. I badgered him, on twitter, until he sent me a copy for free. He cherry picked every single study he could find that had anything to do with autism and had his budy, Bernadette, help him write a book about it. He even makes outlandish claims, like the CDC ignored Geier and Geier's works. (eyeroll). I do think that, between the two of them, James and Bernadette did read all those studies. They just did not use critical thinking skills at all.

The autism parents are the best in the world comment made me very angry. I have a kid on the spectrum. I know many people who are on the spectrum or have kids on the spectrum who are provax and hate what James stands for. But, I know that this is how James makes his living. He lives off book sales, appearances, and donations from his "warriors." So, he is appealing to that awful group of loud antivaxers who think vaccines cause everything bad because this is how he makes a living.

Does this post count as some judo-like tu quoque argument, where our kind host points out that Adams et al, in observing and then screaming about the Herald's misstep, get buried in their own over-the-top past rhetoric and actions? In attempting to push the Herald's editorialist off the precipice, they seem to have forgotten how often they themselves have already plummeted. I won't go on to mention glass houses.

While I have no problem with security, and while I think Wakefield probably does need a security guard, to use guns to suppress free speech is abhorrent.

I think "abhorrent" is a bit strong here. A private event can exclude whomever the organizers wish to exclude, and the security hired is of no particular consequence, unless they start wildly drawing (presumably) legally held sidearms or something.

Mr. Dial-Up-The-Crazy-To-22 has now announced he plans to publish the home addresses of Boston Herald employees.

He's also indignant about a written response from the Mass. Attorney General's Office saying that the Civil Rights Division has decided not to pursue (?his?) complaint filed with the office. So apparently the AG is, like, OK with the mass murder of antivaxers. So bad, so sad. :(

Yes, I made a note of that in a second addendum. I'm starting to think that I might have more to say about Adams' plans than can fit in an addendum. The dude really is despicable.

I also changed the title of the post to reflect more clearly what Adams is doing.

Your second addendum does really make your point, and is concerning.

Mr. Dial-Up-The-Crazy-To-22 has now announced he plans to publish the home addresses of Boston Herald employees.

And apparently has veiny arms as well as ill kempt kitchenware. It's a Photoshop just waiting to happen.

I note that by perceiving themselves as having been told they should be hanged (or worse) by the editorial, they are admitting that they lie to 'vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children'. Ha!
You're so dishonest, you probably think this line is about yoooooo...

^ The "beta testing" bit is a nice non sequitur, though. Maybe that's what "Monsanto Collaborators" was all about, modulo marketing.

In other news on the anti-vaccine front:
Wakefield is apparently deep into a sequel to his laughable disinfo vid Vaxxed:

Article about the Stowe, Vt. chiroquack who has scheduled a group of anti-vaxxers to speak at his k00kfest ( he assures they and he aren't anti-vaccine... really... ):

http://www.mychamplainvalley.com/news/health-event-attracts-controversy…

"Andrew Wakefield, known as the “Father of the Anti-Vaccination Movement,” was scheduled to speak but has since cancelled.

Dr. Rauch says Wakefield had schedule conflicts in the production for the sequel to his documentary, Vaxxed."

The revenue stream from TOS (The Original Scam) must be getting thin so what else to do?
Make a Part II. (Orac mumbling something about Electric Boogaloo?).

Have fun and prepare for round two of the derpicity of Quaxxed Part II.

One might point out to Adams that "hanging offense" has a very clear meaning of a law which carries hanging as an available consequence of a finding of guilt at trial for breaking the law. That is something quite remarkably different from lynching or advocating extrajudicial murder.

Does anyone else think that James Lyons-Weiler's repeated and deliberate mis-spelling of Rachelle Cohen's name smacks of a very specific type of disrespect? To me it feels rooted in racism, but I could be wrong.
Yet another example of how anti-vaxxers can't argue with facts so they go with insults.

And lying to vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children ought to be a hanging offense.

subheading for follow-up:anti-vaxxers admit lying, fear courts will punish them severely
They might consider making a call for advice to that entertainer with the big nose and the big house.

Our non-profit division is also launching the public education site VaccineHolocaust.org where journo-terrorists who deny that vaccines harm children will be named and shamed, providing a permanent record of their crimes against children and humanity.

That whole public shaming thing worked out so well for him last time.

@MJD #18

Interesting question for Orac, whether he has ever been sent to the "principle's office". Not to be a grammar/spelling pedant, but a principle is a moral rule which informs a system of beliefs, so I would think Orac has plenty of contact with "principles". Too bad the antivaxxers have never been sent to that office.

How cool would it be if there really were a "principle's office" in schools, companies, and daily life, where we could send those who lack principles in hopes that they would learn some good ones.

Mr. Dial-Up-The-Crazy-To-22 has now announced he plans to publish the home addresses of Boston Herald employees.

He's threatening the safety of people in an industry that buys ink by the petapixel? Wouldn't he be better-off getting involved in a land war in Asia?

the public education site VaccineHolocaust.org where journo-terrorists who deny that vaccines harm children will be named and shamed

AH, the joy of Alt Facts. "The Holocaust never happened, and anyway it wasn't as bad as my personal delusion."
I am struggling to imagine what is "educational" about a list of people who fail to support Mike with sufficient enthusiasm... I guess he is using the word in the sense of "re-education camps".

Kathy@22

Actually, I do believe Lyons-Weiler did read all those studies because I have his book. I badgered him, on twitter, until he sent me a copy for free.

I've read some extracts of his book. To me it looks like he's taken the lazy method of googling for studies and skimming the abstracts, and if there is anything that can support (or be misrepresented to support) his antivax agenda he will cite the reference.

Does anyone else think that James Lyons-Weiler’s repeated and deliberate mis-spelling of Rachelle Cohen’s name smacks of a very specific type of disrespect? To me it feels rooted in racism, but I could be wrong.

Don't you mean James Lyon-Weener?

I see from the 2nd addendum that Adams still misquote the article, changing the original ill-advised hyperbole "hanging offense" into "hanged to death".

Clicking on the link to the Boston Herald and scanning the comments was very disturbing with nary a sane voice among all the craziness. Don't any sane people read that publication?

Thanks, Narad, for the link to the Supreme Court decision. It's hard to imagine just how bad things were in the 1960's, one hundred years after the end of the civil war, and how brave those students were to confront it.

"... they may be able to protect their children from harm with vitamins."... VITAMINS?... And this is from a man who claims to have read all the research on vaccines.

Noted; that every time I reply to anything here, several regular posters are quick to point out how much smarter you all are than I. As much as I hate to fan the flames; I’m stuck on the irony of the Big Tobacco analogy.

Yet, I agree; the vaccine controversy is an almost exact replica of Operation Berkshire. Except that Big Tobacco does not equal “The Antivaxers”. And “BT” does not even equal “Big Pharma”.

To any lurking Antivaxers: Calling the regular posters here “Pharma Shills” only makes you look paranoid & it’s irrelevant: Pharma doesn’t handle vaccine damage control anymore because historically; the result is an epic fail that has come close to compromising the Immunization programs of several countries.

The Provaxers are correct: You cannot pull off a conspiracy that involves thousands of doctors, scientists, politicians & lawyers; that’s too many potential weak links & that is not what is happening. Nobody is paying off these thousands either; why would they? They do it for free.

BT “got to be right because their science got to be right” but their product was so harmful that it was an unsustainable position. The “PV” (provax) also get to be right because their science "gets to" be right.

And, of course; vaccines are not as dangerous as smoking.

That’s where the differences end. The fact that vaccination is compulsory & smoking is a lifestyle choice became irrelevant when the dangers of “ETS” (environmental tobacco smoke) was discovered. Having smokers in your home, workplace or favorite bar/restaurant was actually forcing non-smokers into “compulsory” exposure.

And that is when BT demonstrated what it "looks like" when you “get to be right” vs. actually being right (following quotes are from Philip Morris documents intended for both media & internal communications, made available at https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu. I will try to include document #’s since I can’t multi-quote):

1. You will identify & label your obviously inferior opponent. Attack of the “Anti‘s“ ensues:

“When we began our interviewing we were not aware of the diversity of opinions among the group we originally labelled "members of the antismoking movement."

"Since anti-smokers are only a tiny fraction of the non-smoking population, they need to legitimize their campaign. To do so, they have misled Americans about the health effects of tobacco smoke in the air, also called environmental
tobacco smoke (ETS)"(#xxxg0093)

2. The Anti's will be accused in headlines of assassinating science:
“SCIENTIFIC OBJECTIVITY LOSES OUT TO
ANTI-SMOKING CRUSADE!"

3. ... because they have challenged the science that gets to be right:

"Another common error involves confusing correlation with causation . No study has ever found proof that secondhand smoke caused cancer with certainty" (zyfh0093)

4. The Anti's & their inferiority become laughable & ominous, all at the same time:

"many substance condemners are not doing science at all, they are doing ideology, politics and material self-interest"

"we examined the documents published by the antismoking movement for obvious violations of the norms of science . We found much social bias and many violations of the norms of science" .

"We have all heard of creative statistics and creative accounting --- cooking the books . Certain members of the antismoking movement now add creative epidemiology to that list of such "creative" practices"

5. ... because all of the SMART people already know that smoking is about as harmful as apples & water:

"An apple for dessert sits on the pristine white table next to the anti-smoker's plate.The air is crisp. No smokers about.
This is the pure, unbesmirched atmosphere the anti-smoker demands. But our anti-smoker had better finish his meal quickly ... that is, if he wants to continue to enjoy clean air. His apple is giving off ethylene gas-enough gas to trick a pineapple plant into flowering,"

" there are many natural chemicals which are more potent
carcinogens than pesticide residues in foods . They said that the average daily intake of DDE, the principal metabolite from DDT, is no more carginogenic than the amount of chloroforn in one glass of tap water ."(zyfh0093)

6. Establish a few Evil Leaders of the uneducated Anti's & "call out" high profile people as being one of them:

"University of California San Francisco professor Stanton Glantz has now publicly admitted using the wrong data in his study of smoke-free bar ordinances, which analyzed the economic impact of bans in bars in seven communities in California. I don't know who should be more embarrassed, the University of California for continuing to employ Dr . Glantz, or the American Journal of Public Health for blindly publishing this man's work under the cloak of an obviously incompetent
"peer review process ."(rfy0090)

"FDA Commissioner Kessler -- who has aggressively sought to
expand the agency's powers and funding since his appointment in 1990 -- is "a zealous anti-smoker ."(rsny0094)

7. Add some "Woo":

"And disregard for objective grounds for regulation was not confined to environmental tobacco smoke. It also extended to other "imaginary risks" including electromagnetic fields, lead contamination, dioxins and "the innumerable scares of the month that are constantly put forth to inflame our collective
anxieties "

8. Suggest that "everything else" is to blame & twist the knife with an arrogant & ridiculous claim:

" we do not know all of the things that might affect lung cancer. As an example, exposure to radon, the gas that seeps out of granite rock, has only recently been associated with lung cancer. Statisticians can never be certain that they have asked all of the pertinent questions . In fact, most environmental tobacco smoke (ETS - the term scientists give to tobacco smoke in the air) studies omit many basic questions, even on factors such as diet "

"THE world's leading health organisation has withheld from puhlication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect ."(msby0090)

... And THAT is what it might "look like", if Big Tobacco & their "only right because you get to be" (for now) science was an accurate analogy for the Pro vs Antivaxer issue.

(If it looks like a duck & walks like a duck & sounds like a duck ... *quack quack* ...)

What?

Hitler, Assad, Trump, Spicer, Godwin, Sarin, Zyklon B, Chemical Weapon, Termites

gregladen — Wed, 12 Apr 2017 07:54:36 +0000

Hitler, Assad, Trump, Spicer, Godwin, Sarin, Zyklon B, Chemical Weapon, Termites

Why Hitler is Different

Hitler is not entirely different from Pol Pot, Stalin, and the other mass killers. He is not entirely different from other fascists. But there is a short list of people, with Hitler on that list, who have this characteristic: They were so bad that we can not and should not compare their badness to each other outside of certain limited academic contexts, and they were so bad that any comparison made between them and their works to anyone not on that list, or to their works, threatens to devalue their badness.

We can not devalue the evil of Hitler or his kind. Historically, Hitler is our contemporary. His Holocaust was horrible and it could happen again. Oh, and this: It really happened. “To forget the dead would be akin to killing them a second time.”*

The third or fourth most common fallacy on the Internet is that Godwin's Law prohibits making references to or comparisons with Hitler or Nazis. This is untrue. Godwin is not a law, but an observation, that among certain sorts of internet denizens, given enough time, someone would make a Hitler or Nazi comparison. And, it was a joke. It was Godwin's Joke.

But, that fact that Godwin's Law does not actually exist does not mean blithe comparisons to Hitler or Nazis are not frequently unwise. However, the fact that such comparisons are frequently unwise does not mean that they are always unwise for the same reasons.

When people compare Donald Trump to Adolph Hitler appropriately (meaning, in a defensible manner helpful to understanding current events by reference to history) they are potentially doing a good thing. Making that comparison to Hitler that devalue Hitler's badness is always bad, even though that is usually not the intent of the comparison. Simply saying that Trump and Hitler are the same is an example of that. The comparison that I've seen that does potentially make sense, and that does not devalue the horrors of the past, is really one comparing the people and politics now to the people and politics then.

Here is the argument for that.

If we regard Trump as a demagogue who has never shown one iota of respect for the democratic process, then we may be very concerned that when push comes to shove, he'll push the Constitution and the law out of the way and shove whatever he wants down our throats. He has said many things that indicate he is capable of this, and has even said things suggesting that he may be planning this. Since we can't tell the difference between Trump's purposeful bloviating and his incidental ignorance, we must assume that when he tells us that his popularity would go up if he murdered someone, that Trump murdering someone is on the list of possibilities. When he tells us that he intends to make Mexico pay for a wall, and since we know that the only way to force another country to pay for something they refuse to pay for is to take over their government, then the possibility that an invasion of Mexico is in fact on the table, as outrageous as that sounds.

If Trump is heading in the direction of tossing aside democracy, which as I've argued elsewhere would not be difficult in our system, given the fact that he is in charge of the most powerful country in the world, the possibility of a Hitler-resembling result has to be considered. Trump is a democratically elected leader of a country with elections. Hitler was too. Hitler became a fascist dictator. Trump talks like a fascist dictator, like a person who wants to be a fascist dictator. It is said that Trump's followers feel dispossessed and that is why he won the election (I do not fully subscribe to that but it is said...) Same with Hitler's supporters. Polls have indicated that many of Trump's followers disdain democracy and would be OK with a dictatorship as long as it is their guy in charge. And so on.

The comparison between any rising leader with fascist tendencies supported by people who are not appalled by fascism, on one hand, with any or all actual historical fascists, is not only acceptable but necessary. "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1" becomes "As the prospect of a fascist taking over the country grows larger, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1." No longer a joke, is it?

Spicer's Sin

Sean Spicer, the hapless presidential press secretary, made that Hitler comparison the other day, and outraged people. Then, of course, the Internet got it all wrong.

Spicer said,

We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II ... You had someone as despicable as Hitler didn't even sink to using chemical weapons. If you're Russia, you have to ask yourself if this is a country and regime that you want to align yourself with...When it comes to sarin gas, he was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing...In the way that Assad used them where he went into towns and dropped him down on innocents in the middle of town was not the same.

The Internet, in response, said,

Of course Hitler used chemical weapons on his own people, that's what the Holocaust was, stupid! Zyklon B is what Hitler used, and that is a chemical weapon!

And, references to Zyklon B have increased dramatically. Zyklon B was one of the killing tools used during the Holocaust, the preferred gas chamber chemical.

The Internet is wrong about his in two important ways.

First, Spicer's reference was not a sin because he messed up the chemical weapons problem (we'll come back to that in a moment). His reference was a sin because he totally messed up history while at the same time equating Assad with Hitler. Now, nobody likes Assad, and it is quite possible (if not likely) that this jerk would be just as bad as Hitler if he was in Hitler's boots. But he wasn't, and therefore he didn't. Hitler was Hitler because of what he thought and what he did, and whom he cultivated and surrounded himself with, and the historical contexts of his time allowing him to get away with certain things, and so on. Assad in a Tardis, replacing Hitler in 1938, might have even been worse than Hitler. But that didn't happen. The comparison devalues Hitler simply because Assad, in the big historical pictures, is a real jerk, but in fact, a minor jerk. Hitler, by comparison, and Hitler's Holocaust, is on the list of the worst things that happened ever.

Spicer was, however, trying to make a valid point but because a) he is ignorant of history and b) insensitive to the Hitler problem, totally screwed it up. Or at least, I think he was trying to make a valid point. Here is how I might have said it, subject to revision:

Assad's use of chemical weapons goes against a global disdain for such things, that has been embodied in international law for decades. The Hague made them illegal at the end of the nineteenth century, and their occasional use has universally been regarded with disdain.

By the way, Hitler produced chemical weapons and had artillery shells armed with them, but never used them. There were plans for significantly expanding their production, never finished by the end of the war. While the Japanese used chemical weapons during that war, the Germans did not really do so. The reasons are not clear and this is a point of controversy among historians. The Germans relied a great deal in some theaters on horses, and despite their efforts, the Germans were not able to make an effective equine gas mask. The allies were known to have large stockpiles of chemical weapons, despite them being illegal, and Hitler was sufficiently afraid that they would be used in retaliation of German use that he never allowed armed munitians to be near front line officers, who might go rogue and fire them off.

What the Germans did do, in the war theater, was to use chemically produced gasses to clear mainly Russians out of underground bunkers, and in one or more cases, to kill large number of people hidden underground, in Odessa and various locations in the Crimea (See: "Absolute War: Soviet Russia in the Second World War").

The second thing the Internet got wrong was the seemingly innocent but in fact very dangerous conflation of the idea of gassing people on the battlefield using a chemical weapon and gassing people in death camps as part of the Holocaust. The word "gas" is used in both places, but there is a nearly complete (see below) and critical distinction between the two. This may seem like an academic nitpic, but it is not.

At some point in the future, the future version of Colin Powell is going to explain to the UN, the US government, Congress, the American People, etc. that we need to invade a certain country because they have weapons of mass destruction. But it might be a lie, like it was last time. And, following our most recent bout of self inflicted ignorance, that lie could rely on the conflation of killing gasses used in warfare with killing gasses not used in warfare.

The former are restricted by international law and highly monitored. The latter are routinely produced in numerous factories around the world and used in agriculture and other areas. Zyklon B was an insecticide, then it was used to kill about 1 million people in the Nazi death camps. Then it was an insecticide again, and it still is. It is not the most commonly used insecticide, but it or a close version of it is still produced in various countries, and a wide range of roughly equivalent gasses are produced widely and used widely. If we want to say that these are "chemical weapons," which is exactly what the Internet is insisting that we say right now, then we are handing Future Colin Powell Clone an argument to invade.

Now, I need to add an important detail. Even though Hydrogen cyanide (which is what Zyklon B delivers) is primarily an insecticide these days and not generally useful as a weapon of war, dropped on enemy troops or people and the like, it has been used for this. Zyklon A (called just "Zyklon" before "Zyklon B" came along) was actually used (not extensively) during World War I (called "The Great War" before "World War II" came along). So called "blood agents" using Hydrogen cyanide are among the chemicals listed as "chemical weapons" but they are not considered very effective or useful on the battlefield. Also, note, while Zyklon B was used to kill more people in the Holocaust other gasses were used that would have made even less effective chemical weapons, such as CO.

It is not sufficient to say, as some will I'm sure, "it is too a weapon because it was used to harm or kill therefore it was a chemical weapon therefore shut up." But that is simply wrong. Again: someday someone is going to argue for an invasion of some place because of WMD's and the WMD's are going to be pesticides manufactured in a legal and normal factory in that country for use in agriculture or other legal contexts. That's going to happen no matter what. Let's not lay the groundwork to make that easier.

The other part of Spicer's remark that is clearly wrong is the idea that Assad attacked his own people last week, but Hitler "did not use gas" against his own people. The difference between using real chemical weapons vs. some other kind of gas on his own people is in this context a pedantic point. That it is pedantic in this context does not mean it is also pedantic in the context of what a Weapon of Mass Destruction is. It is partly because of Spicer's ham handed treatment of the discussion that we might end up making this mistake where making the mistake has significant material and life threatening consequences. Yes, of course, Hitler attacked his own people. No, it really wasn't using "chemical weapons" as they are defined by treaty and conventions of warfare. But no, it does not matter in understanding the idiocy of Spicer's remarks -- not the remarks but the idiocy. Never mind the additional complexity that the Jews and others were not Hitler's own people according to Hitler, or that the Syrian "rebels" are not Assad's own people according to Assad.

My advice to Spicer: Don't ever make any references to history, because you know nothing about history. Try, generally, to say less because you almost always screw up whatever you say. Consider a different job, like the job you formerly had in the White House, as shown in the illustration to the right. And just, well, shut up.

gregladen Wed, 04/12/2017 - 03:54

Tags

President Donald Trump

Thanks for this post.

Just as a point of pedantry (because you were pretty thorough, and it hit me squarely in my OCD), the Syria-Germany comparison is apples and oranges anyway since Germany wasn't in a civil war, no?

Juan Cole comes at it from a different angle:
https://www.juancole.com/2017/04/washingtons-demonization-spicer.html

Trump: "Saddam Hussein throws a little gas, everyone goes crazy, 'oh he's using gas!'"
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-praises-sadd…

"...but Hitler “did not use gas” against his own people."

Hitler didn't think the people he killed were his people. A part of me wonders whether Spicer views things the same way.

Hitler...who cares...he was possibly as stoopid crazy as the tumpkin, but they are NOT the problem!! How many people did Hitler kill?? NONE!! It was the Nazis that where the real evil. Hitler (tumpkin) can give all the orders he wants, If everyone else says "FUCK NO" then it is nothing. But there are too many who are like the Nazis, in that they agree that its OK to just kill people because some dumb-ass says so!!! And that is what I fear here!!!

Knowledge is knowing an apple and an orange are both fruit. Wisdom is not making applesauce out of oranges

Zyklon B is hydrogen cyanide.

The US used hydrogen cyanide in gas chambers to kill people, and some states still allow its use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_chamber#United_States

“…but Hitler “did not use gas” against his own people.”

Nope, he did. German Jews and Bolsheviks and the educated were all sent to concentration camps, most of those died from chemical weapons used by Germany.

Ah!
:-)

On even days I'm a splitter
On odd days I'm a lumper
It's all in the sauce...

-----------

"There are two kinds of people in the world: Those who believe there are two kinds of people in the world and those who don't."
~ Robert Benchley

And apologies in advance, because it's a compulsion with me:

"It’s a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable, it’s very wrong to say it’s a suspension bridge."
~ The Big Bang Theory

It would be easy enough to say that Spicer's comparison of Assad and Hitler was misspoken, were it not for Spicer's subsequent "clarifications".

The initial statement was that Hitler did not use gas during World War II. Which, of course, he did. The people responsible have been sacked.

Then he amended that to Hitler not using gas against his own people. Which, again, he did. The people responsible for the sackings have been sacked.

Then he admitted, OK, there were "holocaust centers". Most people refer to them as "concentration camps" or even "death camps". The people responsible for sacking the people responsible for the sackings, have been sacked.

Oh, and there was a good reason Hitler didn't use gas on the Western Front. A slight wind shift would result in him gassing his own troops instead of the enemy's. The risk is reduced if you are using them against a fortified position, like the trenches of World War I, but it is not entirely absent, and during World War II the Western front was not so heavily dependent on fortified positions.

I don't know who first stated this: Those that forget history are bound to repeat it.

It appears that the leaders of this country have forgotten history either willfully or through plain lack of intelligence.

When will Sean Spicer be sacked? (Actually it looks like even odds whether he is sacked or leaves of his own accord.)

By the way: relevant to the second picture that goes with this post, I wonder if anyone who posts here, besides myself, has seen Donny Darko.

Here's an image.

Eric, exactly.

I'd like to mention though that the word "center" appears in the terminology of the death camps. I'm pretty sure, just can't remember exactly how. May look it up.

"euthanasia killing center"

#3 dean

Hitler didn’t think the people he killed were his people. A part of me wonders whether Spicer views things the same way.

That was what struck me. Not unreasonably, IMO, given the miasma of antisemitism in the air at the moment.

Rich Bly - it was the Italian philosopher George Santayana. The exact quote is "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Greg - another way to "make" Mexico pay for the wall is one that Trump hinted at - put an import duty to be paid on all goods crossing the border that originate in Mexico and use that - . Another way would be to blockade Mexico and then close the border to all trade until they agree to pay. Of course either of those would wreak havoc on the US economy but neither involves invading the country.

Doug nor would any of it bother drump. He is so fricken sick in the head.

Isn't his family German?

Just askin'

Trump's paternal ancestry is indeed German (the surname was Anglicized from the German Drumpf). His mother was a Scottish immigrant.

Which means that none of Trump's children have four US-born grandparents, and only one (Tiffany, who is Marla's daughter) has more than one US-born grandparent.

So he's also an anchor baby.

>When people compare Donald Trump to Adolph Hitler appropriately

Comparing people to Hitler devalues his badness except when it is done by you or against people you dislike.

Except for Greg, Trump's opponents are saying Hitler analogies are terrible no-nos. Are we sure it was a gaffe by Spicer? That use of 'Holocaust center' in Eric's comment makes me suspicious. It sounds like something Trump would say.

"Comparing people to Hitler devalues his badness"

No it doesn't Comparing the size of London to the size of Paris doesn't make London change.

Comparing people to Ghandi doesn't devalue his greatness, either.

Comparing people to other people is a comparison.

Only those who have nothing accurate to claim about the comparison being incorrect make any bones about the comparison itself rather than whether it is validly computed.

"Trump’s opponents are saying Hitler analogies are terrible no-nos."

What? All of them?

Bull.
Shit.

Practically all of them?

Bollocks.

Some of them? Possibly, where, though? Because "some" include "one", and you've given not one yet, so we don't even know it is that high.

All we have is a moron claiming that others said it, when they take those people's word for nothing, meaning that they should be taking their word for nothing here either, and, indeed, should be shouting, as they always do with their claims, the actual opposite.

So why aren't you clamouring for comparisons to Hitler for the german anchor baby, "mike"?

Greg's point was echoed by Chris Matthews 4 years ago, and no one noticed.

"don't use chemical weapons. We didn't use them in World War II, Hitler didn't use them."

Nobody noticed Chris' making that point and nobody noticed Greg making it either.

Since you knew both made it, your "nobody" must be "practically nobody", and since there are 7 billion people, the vast majority who never even visit this site, nobody noticed this time either.

And looking for the phrase " We didn’t use them in World War II" only you said that. Care to support your claim or source where it came from if you're merely yet again parroting another person's claim (or lying about it).

Chis Mattews quote. On cue, as per usual, and apropos of nothing, the wingnut monkey troupe is howling in unison over this.

And once again MikeN demonstrates that he has absolutely no idea who "liberals" are and what they think.

https://www.opednews.com/populum/page.php?f=opedne_anthony__060105_chri…

Pedantic objection: Zyclon-B was used as a fumigant, not an insecticide. The difference is subtle.

First, the building needs to be sealed completely for the lethal concentrations of HC to collect. Second, unlike most insecticides HC as used has essentially no residual effect once the building is ventilated. Third, HC in the concentrations used kills pretty much everything and was, in part, valued as a fumigant because it was effective on mice and rats, pretty much every living thing, in addition to insects.

Also, Zyclon-B was a HC delivery system, not the killing gas, HC, itself. The product was originally designed to be placed in the building to be fumigated and unsealed and spread out only as the operators quickly left the building. The HC gas was released from the spread bulk product as the Zyclon-B warmed.

It also needs to be noted that the HC in Zyclon-B was derived from peach, apricot, and other stones from fruits. Many pits have significant amounts of organically bound HC in them. Process and chemically unbind them and you have Zyclon-B. I keep that in mind when anyone tries to tell me that organic products are safe.

Art, that is also very useful to know if you are ever held hostage in an orchard setting. I'm pretty sure McGuyver used this method once.

Thanks for the clarification on the details of terminology.

Art, it's not like intensively farmed peaches don't have HC, though, is it, so it's kinda redundant to keep that in mind only for organic peaches et al...

Trump Against the World

milhayser — Mon, 06 Feb 2017 14:14:37 +0000

Trump Against the World

Donald Trump continues his blitz to fulfill all his campaign promises at once, leaving snowflakes aghast and deplorables cheering for the proto-fascism on parade at The White House. On International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Trump issued a statement "in the name of the perished" without any reference to Jews or anti-semitism, and while his Chief of Staff spun this omission a sign of inclusivity, Mark Hoofnagle writes on Denialism Blog that "this is part of a long history of Holocaust denial, in which the experience, memory, and truth of Jewish survivors and victims is diminished and denied." As Orac writes on Respectful Insolence, "whatever the source of Hitler’s antisemitism, it was one of the animating forces of Nazi-ism, arguably the animating force."

Meanwhile, Greg Laden writes that the U.S. finds itself in a very dangerous situation, wherein income inequality has reached a breaking point and our elected officials no longer play by the rules. Greg says "we now have a man who by all indications intends to dictate, not lead, dictate not rule, dictate not represent." Since his inauguration Trump has not only closed U.S. borders to many foreigners, he has also hobbled public health programs around the world by prohibiting foreign organizations that receive U.S. aid from performing or providing information about abortions. Ironically, as Liz Borkowski writes on The Pump Handle, this rule only serves to increase the rate of abortions worldwide, and also increases the risk posed by global threats such as Ebola. Trump's actions reveal one promise he has failed to keep: that he would be a president for all Americans.

milhayser Mon, 02/06/2017 - 09:14

Tags

Holocaust denial from the White House on International Holocaust Remembrance Day

oracknows — Tue, 31 Jan 2017 02:00:21 +0000

Holocaust denial from the White House on International Holocaust Remembrance Day

Most of my regular readers probably haven't been following this blog long enough to know it, but early in its history this blog was more of a general skeptical blog. True, it always had a heavy emphasis on medical science and pseudoscience, but I also used to write about evolution and other topics from a skeptic perspective. Back then, dating back to the very earliest days after I discovered blogging, Holocaust denial was a frequent topic on this blog because it was a big interest of mine. It still is, even though I haven't had much opportunity to write about it over the last few years. It was just one of the topics that I drifted away from as this blog became more tightly focused on medicine.

That's why I debated about whether I was going to write about this or not. I had a topic all lined up for today, but ultimately decided that it could wait for a day, as I simultaneously kicked myself for not cranking something out over the weekend, given what happened: The White House engaged in Holocaust denial, when it issued a statement on Holocaust Remembrance Day last Friday:

It is with a heavy heart and somber mind that we remember and honor the victims, survivors, heroes of the Holocaust. It is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror.
Yet, we know that in the darkest hours of humanity, light shines the brightest. As we remember those who died, we are deeply grateful to those who risked their lives to save the innocent.

In the name of the perished, I pledge to do everything in my power throughout my Presidency, and my life, to ensure that the forces of evil never again defeat the powers of good. Together, we will make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world.

Do you notice anything? Lots of people did, including someone with whom I seldom agree but who was correct in this case to label the above statement The White House Holocaust Horror. Others called it out for what it is, a form of Holocaust denial, because that's what it is. Here's Senator Tim Kaine, for example:

Holocaust historian Deborah Lipstadt, someone whom I admire a great deal and the subject of the recent film Denial, which portrays her legal battle with David Irving, who sued her for libel in the UK for correctly characterizing him as a Holocaust denier, characterized the "de-Judaization of the Holocaust, as exemplified by the White House statement" as "softcore Holocaust denial."

Now, I'm sure that there will be readers out there who think this is hyperbole, that I'm exaggerating. I will also confess that at first I wasn't sure if this was cluelessness or intentional. A reader reminded me of an example of an atheist organization doing just this sort of thing as part of a protest against the use of the Star of David in a then-proposed Holocaust memorial in Columbus, Ohio. That was cluelessness. At first, I thought the White House statement was cluelessness, but it wasn't. I was quickly disabused of that notion by White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus showing up on Meet The Press to defend the White House statement. Administration spokesperson Hope Hicks also took to the air to lay down the obfuscation, saying that "despite what the media reports, we are an incredible inclusive group and we took into account all of those who suffered." In other words, the omission of any mention of the Jews in the White House statement was intentional.

So why was this omission of the Jews a form of Holocaust denial? Prof. Lipstadt, who followed a similar trajectory as I did, at first thinking the statement a "rookie mistake," begins the explanation:

I quickly learned that the White House had released a statement for Holocaust Remembrance Day that did not mention Jews or anti-Semitism. Instead it bemoaned the “innocent victims.” The internet was buzzing and many people were fuming. Though no fan of Trump, I chalked it up as a rookie mistake by a new administration busy issuing a slew of executive orders. Someone had screwed up. I refused to get agitated, and counseled my growing number of correspondents to hold their fire. A clarification would certainly soon follow. I was wrong.

In a clumsy defense Hope Hicks, the White House director of strategic communications, insisted that, the White House, by not referring to Jews, was acting in an “inclusive” manner. It deserved praise not condemnation. Hicks pointed those who inquired to an article which bemoaned the fact that, too often the “other” victims of the Holocaust were forgotten. Underlying this claim is the contention that the Jews are “stealing” the Holocaust for themselves. It is a calumny founded in anti-Semitism.

I will continue it.

So why the controversy? Why all the outrage? Surely it's not wrong to "include" all the other groups targeted for extermination by the Nazis, such as the Roma, homosexuals, the mentally retarded, and people with mental illnesses, is it? It depends on what you mean by "wrong." It's not wrong in that it's not a bad thing to be inclusive and not to forget the other victims of the Holocaust. On the other hand, intentionally leaving the Jews out of an official statement reveals an intent to provide a distorted view of what the Holocaust actually was. Jews were central to the Holocaust.

As Gord McFee put it:

Does the focus on the Jewishness of the Holocaust take away from or minimize the suffering of the millions of non-Jews who were persecuted? Do the Jews, unintentionally perhaps, try to keep all the suffering for themselves? No. On the other hand, does the Holocaust have a particularly crucial and central Jewish element, even though millions of others died? Simply put, the answer is yes. The Holocaust, from its conception to its implementation had a distinctly Jewish aspect to it and, arguably without this Jewish aspect, there would have been no Holocaust. Most of the non-Jewish people would not have been killed because the killing machinery would not have been put into operation.

Coincidentally, about a week before the statement, I had just finished reading part one of Volker Ullrich's excellent new biography of Adolf Hitler, Hitler: The Ascent (1889-1939). Even though Part 1 ended just before the invasion of Poland, Ullrich included plenty of discussion of the antisemitism that animated the Nazi Party and Adolf Hitler dating back to at least 1920. Indeed, one of the most puzzling questions in considering Hitler is the origin of his extreme antisemitism. Even though information about his life before he joined the Nazi party is sketchy and sources contradictory, with some claiming Hitler was antisemitic as early as his time in Linz, others saying it originated during his time in Vienna, while still others thinking it originated later, after the defeat of Germany in World War I. Everyone agrees, however, that from 1919 through the early 1920s, Hitler demonstrated increasingly intense antisemitism expressed through increasingly violent and apocalyptic imagery.. Whatever the source of Hitler's antisemitism, it was one of the animating forces of Nazi-ism, arguably the animating force. Indeed, Nazis regularly harassed and attacked Jews, while Hitler and other Nazis routinely referred to them as "our misfortune" in speeches and predicted a day of reckoning. Not suprirsingly, Jews were the first people targeted when Hitler came to power in 1933 and remained their target until Berlin burned in 1945.

Ever since Donald Trump became a candidate for President and support of the alt right (translation: white nationalists) coalesced around him, I've periodically remarked that, having drifted away from the topic, I never thought that all that knowledge of the Holocaust, Nazis, neo-Nazis, and white supremacists would ever come in handy again. To this I always add how sad I am that this knowledge has unexpectedly come in very handy all too many times in reent months. In any case, I knew immediately that it's a common, long-standing Holocaust denial trope to deny the centrality of Jews to the Holocaust. Basically, Holocaust deniers will say something along the lines of, “The Nazis killed lots of people during the Holocaust, not just Jews. What makes the Jews so special? The Holocaust was about more than the Jews.” Sound familiar? That's almost exactly what Trump administration flacks have been saying since Friday with its language about how Trump was trying to be "inclusive." The part about "What makes the Jews so special?" was implied, but not missed, as we will see.

Let’s be clear, though. The central purpose of the Holocaust was to rid the Reich of its Jews, and the Jews were central to the Holocaust. It started with taking away their rights, then evolved to violence against them, both promoted and carried out by the government, then to forced expulsion, and then finally to mass extermination. Yes, the Holocaust later expanded to target lot of other groups that the Nazis didn’t like, but it started with the Jews. To deny this is to deny the essence of the Holocaust.

As Podhoretz puts it:

No, Hope Hicks, and no to whomever you are serving as a mouthpiece. The Nazis killed an astonishing number of people in monstrous ways and targeted certain groups—Gypsies, the mentally challenged, and open homosexuals, among others. But the Final Solution was aimed solely at the Jews. The Holocaust was about the Jews. There is no “proud” way to offer a remembrance of the Holocaust that does not reflect that simple, awful, world-historical fact. To universalize it to “all those who suffered” is to scrub the Holocaust of its meaning.

Gord McFee agrees:

To minimize or trivialize the "Jewishness" of the Final Solution is to seriously understate, if not, unintentionally perhaps, deny its essence. This does not mean that the suffering of other groups is to be ignored; on the contrary, it was terrible. But without the Holocaust, without the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question", the others live. The term "holocaust" was coined to describe the uniquely Jewish aspect of the Final Solution. It does not seek to negate the suffering of the other victims.

As does John Scalzi, who points out how stupid the whole act was:

Bannon’s reflexive racism and anti-semitism makes the Trump administration do stupid things, a fine example being it offering up a release on Holocaust Remembrance Day that somehow didn’t manage to mention the Jews, i.e., the principal targets of the Holocaust and the reason the Nazi’s built out the entire apparatus of the Holocaust. When called on it, the White House offered the same rhetorical line — “well, others suffered in the Holocaust, too” — that Holocaust deniers use to minimize the extent of the atrocity done to the Jews. Bannon’s fingerprints are all over this, and it’s appalling both that the White House put out a release like this, and that it either didn’t realize that everyone would see the dog whistle to America’s home-grown Nazis… or it didn’t care whether everyone saw it or not. Either, to me, is all Bannon; neither is especially smart.

Prof. Lipstadt elaborates:

There were indeed millions of innocent people whom the Nazis killed in many horrific ways, some in the course of the war and some because the Germans perceived them—however deluded their perception—to pose a threat to their rule. They suffered terribly. But that was not the Holocaust.

The Holocaust was something entirely different. It was an organized program with the goal of wiping out a specific people. Jews did not have to do anything to be perceived as worthy of being murdered. Old people who had to be wheeled to the deportation trains and babies who had to be carried were all to be killed. The point was not, as in occupied countries, to get rid of people because they might mount a resistance to Nazism, but to get rid of Jews because they were Jews. Roma (Gypsies) were also targeted. Many were murdered. But the Nazi anti-Roma policy was inconsistent. Some could live in peace and even serve in the German army.

I cant' help but note here that those who seek to minimize the centrality of the Jews to the Holocaust sometimes like to point out that Communists were also targeted, but such an argument conveniently neglects the way that Hitler conflated Jews and Communism, believing Communism to be a product of Jews and frequently invoking "Judeo-Bolshevism" as the enemy of the Germany people. This is a common conspiracy theory that views Communism as a Jewish conspiracy, positing that Jews dominate and control worldwide Communist movements.

Prof. Lipstadt further observes:

Softcore denial uses different tactics but has the same end-goal. (I use hardcore and softcore deliberately because I see denial as a form of historiographic pornography.) It does not deny the facts, but it minimizes them, arguing that Jews use the Holocaust to draw attention away from criticism of Israel. Softcore denial also makes all sorts of false comparisons to the Holocaust. In certain Eastern European countries today, those who fought the Nazis may be lauded, but if they did so with a communist resistance group they may be prosecuted. Softcore denial also includes Holocaust minimization, as when someone suggests it was not so bad. “Why are we hearing about that again?”

A lot of people don't understand that, just as there are gradations of antivaccine views (for example), there are gradations of Holocaust denial. Relatively few deniers outright deny that millions of Jews died during the Holocaust. There is just too much evidence that they did for even the most antisemitic of Nazis to outright deny it. There are some, of course, who claim that millions of Jews didn't die, that there were no gas chambers, and that the Holocaust is all a big Jewish conspiracy, the "Holohoax," as some call it. They're the equivalent gradation of Holocaust denier as antivaxers who deny that vaccines work at all and claim they are dangerous or cause disease instead of preventing it are among vaccine denialists. (No, I'm not saying antivaccinationists are the equivalent of Holocaust deniers, just that the two denialism systems exist along their own spectrums of denialist beliefs, not as a yes/no clearcut dichotomy.) Then there are the "softcore" Holocaust deniers, as Prof. Lipstadt terms them. They range from conceding that millions of Jews were killed during World War II and denying that there was a systematic plan (the "World War II was horrible and millions of civilians died" gambit) to those who concede that millions of Jews were targeted and killed but, as the White House statement did, "de-Judaize" it by pointing to the other groups targeted by Nazis. (The "Nazis were horrible and targeted lots of groups" gambit.) In levels of denial, the equivalent would be the "too many too soon" antivaccine activists, who concede that vaccines prevent disease but promote "concerns" that somehow the current vaccine schedule is too much of a good thing that "overwhelms" a baby's immune system.

Of course, one way to tell if this is Holocaust denial is to look at how real Holocaust deniers reacted to it, for example, Chemi Shalev:

Daily Stormer praises Trump for daring to reject Jewish "science fiction" about Holocaust. https://t.co/yt8b6fN8gu

— Chemi Shalev (@ChemiShalev) January 29, 2017

A Trump supporter responded:

@ChemiShalev There were no gas chambers. You're lucky Trump doesn't launch an official investigation to debunk the whole thing.

— Conservo-Nationalist (@Tabula_Media) January 29, 2017

And:

After 70 years of guilt tripping society with a constant barrage of Holocaust propaganda, is it time for Jews to get over it?

— Conservo-Nationalist (@Tabula_Media) January 30, 2017

You get the idea.

The Daily Stormer is, of course, a vile, white supremacist, neo-Nazi site. The article linked to above was written by Erik Striker and characterizes "organized Jewry" as "frothing at the mouth" over Trump's statement. It also includes gems like:

The political “misstep”? Equating the suffering of all innocent people in World War II with the sufferink of Jews, which we all are supposed to know is different because Jews are a superior race.

This is the first time in history the President of the United States has made no mention of Jews, anti-Semitism, or the science fiction Zionist folklore about ovens and gas chambers so prominent in (((Hollywood))) narratives.

The Six Million meme Jews require their agents to constantly repeat through amplifiers in order to make the lie stick was also avoided. Without constant repetition, the myth and meme begins to decompose.

The writers at The Daily Stormer are hardcore Holocaust deniers, hence the reference to the "Six Million meme" and "myth." Either way a real Holocaust denier of the "Holohoax" variety, is happy that Trump is "exceeding expectations in pushing back against Jewish supremacy." Elsewhere, Andrew Anglin gloats, "Do you get it now, Jews? The jig is up."

Of course, none of this should be surprising. As Mark Hoofnagle points out, candidate Trump played footsie with white nationalists, who in turn adore him, and has been "hiring white nationalists, including Steve Bannon (also an alleged anti-Semite), and repeating propaganda from white supremacists (eg whitegenocide) and neo-nazis repeatedly during the campaign (anyone remember the “Sheriff’s Star”?)," summing it all up:

To summarize, this is classic Holocaust denial from an administration that (1) has been documented courting racists and neo-Nazis, (2) has a known white nationalist as a political advisor to the president, (3) has admitted the exclusion of the Jews from the statement was purposeful, (4) has expressed no regret about excluding Jews from the statement, and (5) received acclaim from neo-Nazis for the use of this language.

Exactly. Also, one more time, accepting that the Final Solution was, first and foremost, targeted at the Jews in no way minimizes or trivializes the suffering of other targeted groups. It merely acknowledges that the Holocaust grew from its primary focus on the Jews to target those other groups. As Prof. Lipstadt put it, those groups might also have been exterminated had Germany won, but the only group the Germans couldn't wait until the end of the war to kill was the Jews.

Sadly, I'm beginning to wonder if this is the reading list at the White House.

The bottom line is disturbing. Not only do we have a science-denying administration in power, as evidenced by the appointment of anthropogenic global climate change denialists in positions of power, meeting with antivaccinationists like Andrew Wakefield and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., appointing a member of a crank medical organization as Secretary of Health and Human Services, and considering for the position of FDA commissioner technolibertarian cranks who think that online rating systems can replace science, but this administration openly spouts "softcore" Holocaust denial on Holocaust Remembrance Day, the same day Trump instituted a ban on refugees and immigrants from seven Middle Eastern countries that he linked to terrorism. I used to say that I feared for medical science under Donald Trump, but now I fear that that's the least of my worries for the next four years.

I also keep saying that nothing Donald Trump does surprises me any more, but fear that he'll prove me wrong.

oracknows Mon, 01/30/2017 - 21:00

Categories

Policy

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316994-jewish-aide-wrote-tru…

SJWs have reprogrammed Orac.

I don't agree with your interpretation. The White House statement was inclusive, because, in the future, the next victims of Nazi-like ideologies may not necessarily be Jews, but they can be Muslims or immigrants.

You are, quite simply, incorrect about the Holocausr, although you are correct that next time the victims might be some other group than Jews.

A 'white-wash' from the 'gas-bags' occupying the U.S. administration? No, I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Some people really need a history-class.
I think last week also the Wahnsee conference was reminded, which is considered the starting-point of the Holocaust and by all means, this conference was about removing all Jews, because they were considered a tread, unlike other victims of the Nazis, which were just considered not worthy to live.

Some weeks ago a member of the German populist party considered the Holocaust monument in Berlin, to be a monument of shame and that Germany should be proud on his history and not just reminding the 12 years when Hitler ruled. This was a former history-teacher.
The populist party didn't kick him out, which speaks volumes to me.

When I hear the word "holocaust" I immediately think: Nazi extermination of Jews. Unless reminded I forget that other groups were sent to the extermination camps too.

I read and re-read and kept on re-reading the statement in question and could not see the problem. I was thinking purely in terms of extermination of Jews and I simply could not see a problem.

You see, that's my problem; I always forget that other groups suffered too.

I fear we are seeing the ultimate Gish Gallop--albeit with the power of the Office of the President of the United States behind those doing the gallop.

@Jake - you should be embarrassed....the Holocaust is something that is set apart from the other atrocities of the Nazis. It would be entirely appropriate to talk about the other millions who died as part of Nazi barbarity, but no group was as singled out and quite literally "exterminated" as the Jews.

To ignore this singular issue, is to show just how biased and out of touch you really are.

And yes, next time it may just be another group - or, based on some of Trump's closest advisors, we might be right back to where all of this started too.

@Daniel - there is "inclusiveness" and then there is ignoring the singular, most poignant part of the Holocaust.

It would have been entirely appropriate to have issued a statement of sympathy for all victims, while also highlighting the fact that the Final Solution was directly specifically to eliminate the Jewish people from the planet.

@ Orac
I didn't make any statement on the Holocaust, only on the White House statement.

@Jake - to use Social Justice Warrior as a pejorative term is a clear statement that your opinions are so far from those of reasonable compassionate people that anything you say can safely be used as a guide to correct thinking - if you say it it is clearly wrong.

@Jake: We all know that Ivanka Trump married a Jew and converted to Judaism, and that she and her husband are among her father's closest advisors.

Many of us are also familiar with the perjorative "Uncle Tom". It originally referred to black slaves in the US who would help their masters oppress other black slaves.

You should be able to deduce that many people consider Ivanka and Jared to be the Jewish equivalent of Uncle Toms.

Sadly antisemitism has been embraced by both the Left and the Right. The worst encounter with it I have had was when I confronted a pro-Palestinian activist whose home made slogans on his t-shirt called for Jews to be burned alive. His final argument before storming off was to tell me that by putting the word 'Israeli' in front of the word 'Jew' made the slogans legitimate political comment.

As for 'soft holocaust denial' it is much more dangerous and insidious because it emanates from both sides of politics, the Right is easy to oppose, the Left almost impossible, because they have powerful ideological tools to disarm critics.

In addition to the Holocaust denial in Trump's speech, Friday was the day he released the executive order banning the issuing of visas and the admission of people from seven predominantly Muslim countries, including refugees and other people already holding valid visas or even green cards. Despite multiple injunctions against the order, Customs and Border Patrol officials are still enforcing it. Last night Trump fired Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who refused to defend the order because of its questionable legality.

The Holocaust started out with anti-Semitic rhetoric very much like the anti-Muslim rhetoric we have been hearing from the right. It can happen again. Especially with a President who seems to think he is not bound by law.

Jared Kushner, son-in-law & adviser of Drumpf, is the grandson of Holocaust survivors. I wonder what Kushner & his extended family feel about this particular imbroglio. Severe embarrassment hopefully.

I don't get the sense that Jared (or Ivanka) care one bit...because they are part of the "inner circle" and don't need to be concerned with how they are viewed.

I also don't get the sense that people like Steve Bannon & Miller care that they are viewed as antisemitic, since it plays to their base.

Jake:Oh buzz off and go screw yourself, waste-of-space fascist jerk-off.

Dr.Bollocks: I don't think Mr. Kushner has the capacity for embarassment, empathy or any human feelings at all or he wouldn't have married into a family full of monsters.

Jake @#1: Consume excrement and expire.

Graham @#13: Do you have anything to back up the claims in your little "Both Sides Do It" screed, or are you just running the same game so many others do?

Chan Kobun, the Ghost-Who-Waddles writes (#18),

Consume excrement and expire.

MJD says,

Autism symptoms improve after fecal transplant, small study finds.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170123094638.htm

I guess acknowledging the Jews would be in tension with the quest to make racism great again.

More seriously, many of the recent steps appear to be work towards mainstreaming racist views, giving them support. Does that seem right?

SJWs have reprogrammed Orac.

Yah, Jake, but what does John Best think of the statement? Is he still commenting at your place after that little Protocols mix-up, or are you mostly stuck with Hans/Sophie/Georg/White Rose?

You know the old statement, "If you lie down with dogs, you might get fleas"?

It's the same thing. If you don't want to be seen as a Holocaust denier, don't say things that deniers support.

Someone with shame might be appalled that Holocaust deniers would celebrate what they say.

@ Eric #14

Pertinent here is the Secretary General of the U.N.

oday, we honour the victims of the Holocaust, an incomparable tragedy in human history.

The world has a duty to remember that the Holocaust was a systematic attempt to eliminate the Jewish people and so many others.

It would be a dangerous error to think of the Holocaust as simply the result of the insanity of a group of criminal Nazis. On the contrary, the Holocaust was the culmination of millennia of hatred, scapegoating and discrimination targeting the Jews, what we now call anti-Semitism.

Tragically, and contrary to our resolve, anti-Semitism continues to thrive. We are also seeing a deeply troubling rise in extremism, xenophobia, racism and anti-Muslim hatred. Irrationality and intolerance are back.

This is in complete contrast to the universal values enshrined in the United Nations Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

http://www.un.org/en/holocaustremembrance/2017/SG.html

Marry me Mindy: Someone with shame might be appalled that Holocaust deniers would celebrate what they say.

Someone with shame or even a smidgen of feelings wouldn't have accepted an endorsement from Richard Spencer or David Duke.

FFS, Jake Crosby is sounding more like D*nnis M*rkuze every damned day. If it weren't for monomania being a known autistic trait coupled with his public history of abusive upbringing by unhinged hateful monsters, I would armchair-diagnose him as one of those "diagnostic substitutions" we hear about and immediately prescribe a supertanker-sized bottle of elephant tranquilizers and emergency fuckoff. What a hideously screwed-up human being.

"All Holocaust Victims Matter"

“All Holocaust Victims Matter”

Eli@26: I have no way of telling whether this post is snark, but I have seen people point out that in effect, Trump "All Lives Matter"-ed the Holocaust. Normal people will understand why some Americans, and not just Jews, would find this offensive.

If your post was meant seriously, you are part of the problem. If it was intended as snark, you need to be clearer about your snarking. Remember that Poe's Law is strictly enforced.

Has: Jake's just a monster. I wouldn't waste your sympathy. Those raised by monsters turn into monsters themselves.

Well, let's see:
what hasn't Trump botched this week?

I find his appointments ( with a few exceptions) abysmal but I am especially 'pleased' by how his reps - like Spicer- are dancing around and trying to make his actions sound reasonable and palatable.

I watch my television amazed by these people.

what hasn’t Trump botched this week?

Well, he claims to be backing off a draft EO that, if not enjoined, would have completely eviscerated any protection of LGBTQ people. Although given his propensity for lying, I'd say that assurance plus $2 will get you through the tollbooth in Hampton, NH.

Also, we are not in a shooting war with Iran or China. Yet.

@Denice Walter, #28: Several of Trump's ardent supporters appear to think Spicer's doing a good job. "schooling the media."

@ Eric Lund:

But it's only Tuesday... give him time

He'll name his choice for SCOTUS later.

Perhaps that'll be so bad we'll forget about the immigrant ban for an hour or two.

Someone I know ( not me) seems nearly happy because he knows these recent actions will lead to many donations to some charities he supports like ACLU, ADL.

There has to be better way to raise money besides fear.

@ Dorit Reiss:

I know.
Seems that they define "schooling" differently than I do.

I think he's *motivating* them.

Let me start with the memory of my grandmother saying, "if it didn't happen then somebody has to tell me where a hundred of my relatives are."
There is a uniquely Jewish dimension to the Shoah not delineated by the sheer horror of the numbers. There is another number that is just as important; one out of every three Jews alive in the world was murdered. There are few groups that have faced devastation in modern times (The Rwandan genocide comes to mind. It was smaller by the total, but even higher by percentage, and was accompanied by just as much savage cruelty, and received just about the same world reaction, namely not one rat's ass given.).
The very word "genocide" was first coined to describe what Germany had done to the Jews.
There is another side to the Shoah. This was the first time in modern history that the entire machinery of a state was dedicated first and foremost to the extermination of an entire people. The Nazis had everything planned to the smallest detail. The competitive bidding records for construction of gas chambers are still extant. An army film unit was assigned to record the extermination, and a film was made to document the actions of that unit. Jewish artifacts were gathered for a planned "Museum of a Vanished Race."
Maybe no other genocide was conducted with such cruel cynicism. Everyone is familiar with the "Work Will Make You Free: message above the gate to Auschwitz. Decorated German Jewish veterans of World War 1 were told to report with their families for resettlement in the east. A luxurious passenger train was laid on for them - sleeping cars, dining car, crack staff. It went directly to the platform of Treblinka, where they all were murdered.
So, yes, it is about the Jews, not forgetting all the others who died, but the Jewish dimension is the centerpiece and the core of Germany's crimes.

Trump is treating the Presidency as another version of the Apprentice....as long as he's generating drama, he thinks he's winning (think "ratings").

It doesn't matter what people say, as long as they are talking about him - he has no concept of good or bad, just pure ego.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3OKBROuR-o

OT: Orac, WH.Gov just published the "highlights" of his meeting with pharama cos. today...I know you were concerned about his FDA picks:

"President Trump Works To Make Drugs More Affordable, Create Jobs

Highlights From The President’s Listening Session With Pharmaceutical Industry Leaders

President Trump On His Commitment To Make Drugs More Affordable While Promoting Innovation

PRESIDENT TRUMP: “You folks have done a terrific job over the years, but we have to get prices down for a lot of reasons. We have no choice. For Medicare, for Medicaid, we have to get the prices way down, so that's what we're going to be talking about. We're also going to be streamlining the process so that from your standpoint when you have drug you can actually get it approved, if it works instead of waiting for many, many years. The U.S. drug companies have produced extraordinary results for our country but the pricing has been astronomical for our country.”

President Trump Focused On Cutting Regulations To Encourage Drug Companies To Bring Back Operations And Jobs To The United States

PRESIDENT TRUMP: “So you have to get your companies back here. We have to make progress back. We're going to get rid of a tremendous number of regulations. I know you have some problems where you cannot even think about opening up new plants and then you can't get approval for the plant and then you can't get approval to make the drug.”

President Trump On Appointing A Leader To Streamline The FDA To Reduce Prices And Get New Products On The Market Faster:

PRESIDENT TRUMP: “We’re going to streamline the FDA, we have a fantastic person that I think I we’ll be naming fairly soon, he's going to streamline the FDA and you're going to get your products either approved or not approved but it's going to be a quick process. It’s not going to take 15 years. And we're going to do I think a tremendous -- I think we're going to make a tremendous difference to you. I read where it costs sometimes $2.5 billion on average, actually, to come up with a new product. Is that correct? 15 years, $2.5 billion to come up with a product where there's not even a safety problem. So it's crazy. I’m surprised you can't get them to move faster than that.”"
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/31/president-trump-…

ORD@34: The Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia is estimated to have killed about a third of that country's population in a span of less than four years (April 1975 to December 1978). That includes death by starvation as well as executions. Ethnic (including Chinese, Vietnamese, and Thai) and religious (including Christian and Muslim, as well as Buddhist monks) minorities were targeted, as were "intellectuals", anyone associated with the previous government, anyone who wore glasses, and "economic saboteurs" (frequently, former city dwellers with no agricultural skills). But the bulk of this was Cambodians killing other Cambodians.

Astoundingly (or perhaps not), the Khmer Rouge were allowed to retain Cambodia's seat in the UN for about a decade after they were ousted from Phnom Penh, even though it was known that the regime had engaged in crimes against humanity. Sweden was among the first Western countries to withdraw support for the Khmer Rouge holding the UN seat, and then only because so many Swedish citizens wrote protest letters to their representatives in Parliament.

This would be a good year for Tom Hanks to finally make the movie based on the book In the Garden of Beasts.

Also, I have taken to calling the White House staffers as "Nazi Spicer", "Nazi Bannon" and (of course) "Nazi Trump."

Now I'm starting to get actually worried for my immediate physical safety. I'm not Jewish, but my husband is. And unlike being a Christian, one does not have to practice to be Jewish; it's something you're born to.

I guess it's time to make contact with my Swedish relatives. Crap.

I have taken to calling the White House staffers as “Nazi Spicer”, “Nazi Bannon” and (of course) “Nazi Trump.”

An all too appropriate line from The Big Lebowski: "Say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism, at least it's an ethos."

Bannon is a self-admitted Leninist. He just wants to burn the whole thing down. Trump is simply a 70-year-old toddler. Nobody has ever told him "No!" before and been able to make it stick, because they know he will throw a tantrum if they do and they aren't willing to deal with it. With the Nazis, you could at least appeal to their self-interest--they may have had a warped idea of what that was, but they were familiar with the concept. That won't work with this administration. They want what they want, whether it's actually in their self-interest or not.

@JustaTech: I wouldn't panic yet, but yes, it may be wise to explore your options in case the worst happens. I don't think Trump's people are planning to go after Jews--among other things, the End Times Christianists need to have Israel around in order to fulfill some element of their Rapture/Tribulation prophecies/fantasies--but Bannon is someone you should definitely keep an eye on.

There are several Iranian students affiliated with my institute. I asked some of them today, and they said that while everyone they knew was safely (for now) in the US, there were some friends of friends who were stuck outside the country: at least one in Toronto, and possibly others elsewhere.

Somebody ought to update Orac's Wikipedia description to something like this:

"Orac is an SJW super-computer capable of mimicking any other SJWs' fake hate stories and built by a pretentious hack named Adam Bly. It uses a component called a "Science"Blog – a universal Seed Media component – to shout down ideas he doesn't like as being some form of bigotry. It can also control other computers, especially the one in his bedroom. Orac dislikes work that involves any deference to facts, enjoys gathering hate hoaxes and has delusions of grandeur."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blake's_7

I, too, could have accepted the original press release as merely...abbreviated, shall we say?...given that we're talking about a guy whose favored means of communication is 140 characters or less. But once it's been pointed out that omitting the Jews from a discussion of the Holocaust is a known dog whistle for anti-antisemitism and Holocaust denial, the only acceptable response has to start with the words "it was never our intention to minimize the deliberate genocide carried out against the Jewish people..." etc. You can whine all you want about how you were just trying to be "inclusive" after you've established that baseline level of human decency. I'm still not sure if his actual response reflects closet anti-antisemitism or merely his usual inability to admit he's wrong.

...and immediately prescribe a supertanker-sized bottle of elephant tranquilizers...

I could use that supertanker, especially since Trump won the election.
Make mine a double!

As for the holocaust, I had two uncles help liberate a concentration camp, what little that they were willing to speak about was tinged, even so many decades later, with pure, distilled hatred and rage for the nazis involved.
My junior high school librarian was a holocaust survivor and she also told me some stories, which she considered appropriate for my years.

When the camps and the activities that went on in the camps was initially uncovered, the information was censored, lest there be a massive outcry for the extermination of every German alive. Later, when news did begin to trickle past the censors, that feeling was verified by the popular demand, often repeated, to kill every German alive. Fortunately, sanity prevailed.
Alas, I could never consider that a probable path for this administration.

Jake, now that we've established that you hate Justice, how do you feel about Truth, the American Way, mom and apple pie?

When you add this to the already used "America First" slogan, it's just another rung on the ladder of American 21st Century Fascism.

Autocracies don't have to look like governments out of the 1930s....they will have their own modern spin.

And "useful idiots" like Mr. Crosby will whistle their way through the end of American democracy.

Eric Lund: "Bannon is a self-admitted Leninist. He just wants to burn the whole thing down. Trump is simply a 70-year-old toddler."

I stand corrected. But I am still going to call him a Nazi as an alternative to "alt-right." Though you might enjoy this cartoon:
https://twitter.com/PiaGuerra/status/825894457396514816

When's that Thompson PNAS paper that Hooker promised going to be showing up, Jake? Still trust him?

Slight revision:

“Orac is a super-SJW capable of mimicking any other SJWs’ fake hate stories and built by a pretentious hack named Adam Bly. It uses a component called a “Science”Blog – a universal Seed Media component – to shout down ideas it doesn’t like as being some form of bigotry. It can also control other SJWs, especially the ones who comment on its blog. Orac dislikes work that involves any deference to facts, enjoys gathering hate hoaxes and has delusions of grandeur.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blake's_7

Is that The Gnat I hear buzzing around again? I must admit, the buzzing about "dislikes work that involves any deference to facts, enjoys gathering hate hoaxes and has delusions of grandeur" sure did destroy another irony meter of mine (not to mention give me a hearty chuckle). Otherwise, it's the same old hateful stupidity that The Gnat has unfortunately become known all too well for.

Buzz away, Gnat.

Someone I know ( not me) seems nearly happy because he knows these recent actions will lead to many donations to some charities he supports like ACLU, ADL.

Dare we hope that President Dilophosaurus is unwittingly doing everything possible to hand the Dems the 2018 elections...

Justatech@46 -

Jake Crosby and Truth have never occupied the same grid square.

Awwww... Young Master Crosby is now all grown up and is proudly a Young Nazi Crosby.

Isn't that just adorable?

Awwww… Young Master Crosby is now all grown up and is proudly a Young Nazi Crosby.

I suppose we could call him Young Master Race Crosby now.

Hope Hicks' tortured explanation has most of the elements of a notpology, except for the total absence of anything like an apology. Like all those notpologies, It doesn't recognize why their words were offensive. It doesn't really take ownership. It uses the poor-little-us it's-not-the-real-us gambit. Nor does it show any intent to prevent it from happening again. The only thing missing is "We apologize to anyone who might have been offended."

I'm going to undoubtedly piss people off, but I agree with the original statement and don't find it to be anti-Semitic in any way shape or form. The main argument starts as if it weren't for trying to exterminate the jews, the others wouldn't have been killed. Bull hockey. Eugenics occurred all over the world up to ~1960. This includes in that bastion of evil, Canada. Would the Nazi's who started there camps with the defectives have kept them as work camps if they had not decided to kill Jews, or would they have taken the next step and slaughtered the poor bastards when resources were limited.

I admit to the possibility of being incorrect and inadequate in my knowledge because I never really gave much thought to a group of bigoted morons who got what they so richly deserved. I don't see a problem with including Jews under the rubric of "innocents" instead of naming all the groups killed, or glossing over everyone but the Jews. I hold all genocides to the same standard. Pol pot didn't just slaughter the educated, Stalin didn't just kill Ukrainians. Mao.. Well you get the idea.

Besides.. Is Trump the great redeemer of relations with Israel really supposed to be running an anti-Semitic administration? To me, this seems to be a case of "Look at the way that bitch is eating those crackers"

I have Roma ancestry (yes, really, Vilas - my great grandfather's name - is Sanskrit in origin and he was from Switzerland) and they were murdered in the Holocaust too.

But I would never argue that Jews weren't central to the Holocaust. To do so is a form of Holocaust denial, plain and simple.

There is, though, a name for the Roma genocide in Europe - "Porajmos," the Devouring.

Dare we hope that President Dilophosaurus is unwittingly doing everything possible to hand the Dems the 2018 elections…

He'd have to do quite a lot. In 2018, the terrain for the Senate is as hostile to Democrats as it was to Republicans in 2016, the latter of which was a blown opportunity. Way more Democrats are running for re-election than Republicans, and many are from states Trump won. In the House, gerrymandering will make overcoming the Democrats' current deficit incredibly difficult, maybe impossible.

Still, Trump's off to a good start to give the Democrats a chance to overcome those obstacles and take back the Senate and/or house. I have faith he can do the near-impossible and hand Congress to the Democrats in 20187. :-)

@58 @ 59 JP
And the Roma are still getting treated like crap by most of the European nations. But we're enlightened now, so it must be something they are doing. :-(

But we’re enlightened now, so it must be something they are doing. ?

Well, my family *was* part of the Mafia in the Old Country. I'm guessing young Vilas left before he got his legs broken or something.

My advisor does a bit of victim blaming by pointing out that Roma culture is still oral and very insular...

I didn’t at first realise that it was some kind of a political dog whistle. But yes, it is definitely true that the Jews were singled out far more for the Holocaust. Some Jews escaped as far as Shanghai and were put into a ghetto there, and even there the Nazis tried to put pressure on Japan (which ruled the city at the time) to hand them over. The Japanese governor of Shanghai could not understand why the Nazis hated the Jews so much, and in the end never deported them as he was being pressured to do so.

In the House, gerrymandering will make overcoming the Democrats’ current deficit incredibly difficult, maybe impossible.

The thing about gerrymandering is that a big enough wave can overcome it. The idea is that you try to crowd a bunch of the other party's voters into a few districts, and spread the rest out in such a way that your party has a much narrower edge in a bunch of districts. That's how you get many more representatives from your party than its share of the voters would indicate. But if you have a bunch of, say, R+6 districts in a D+8 election, then many of those districts flip.

I'd be more wary of voter suppression efforts coming down the pike. Trump's Attorney General nominee, Jeff Sessions, was denied a federal judgeship in 1986 (at a time when Republicans had a Senate majority) because he was too racist--he had a documented history as a prosecutor of pursuing dubious voter fraud charges against black people, and he still seems to think that "those people" shouldn't vote.

A Senate flip is definitely not happening. Only 8 of the 33 senators up for reelection are Republicans, and only one of those (Heller in NV) is in a state Clinton carried. The Democrats are defending a bunch of seats in states Trump carried: McCaskill (MO), Heitkamp (ND), Donnelly (IN), Baldwin (WI), Brown (OH), Manchin (WV), and that's just off the top of my head.

What a mess.

I think we all should take the time to read some of the primary historiography relevant to this time period.

We all have the grade-school textbook Pop Culture version of the holocaust in our heads, but how many have actually studied primary sources and chemical and physical data from Aushwitz?

There has been a debate over cyanide residues inside of buildings.

So how many people died? How many Jews are you allowed to subtract from the body count before it becomes a crime?

If I say four million, would you call me a denier?

If I dispel the soap and lampshade myths, what does that make me? An anti-semite? Come on people, let's be rational.

But just as worse as stubbornly defending lollipop history is those who take anything radical and run with it. The people who follow the precept of "the most radical departure from established history" is most likely to be true.

Not so. There are outlets who pander to these folks: the National Enquirer, Jim Fetzer, and the New York Post. People can make many money by pulling something radical, intriguing, and false out of a hat and writing a book or going on a lecture tour.

The truth behind WWII is there for anyone's taking. It involves serious reading of many different historians, and not just the establishment historians because, let's face it, history is a highly politicized craft and historians are often financially dependent on politicians and the patrons of biographies and such.

For example, If I were charge an author with the task of writing a biography about me, I certainly would tell him to leave out the part where I was caught masturbating in a tree next to my neighbor's window (was that me or was that Michael Skakel? I forgot. I remember now, It was Micheal Skakel.)

Anyway, it's not so cut and dry. We all know that certain lies have been placed in Public School textbooks and it is up to us to disabuse ourselves of those lies. Just the simple passage: "Columbus discovered America" is without a doubt the most outrageous thing you could write on paper.

Ah. Our first Holocaust denier. No, no, don't try to say otherwise. I've been doing this nearly 20 years, and, even though I've been out of action in the Holocaust denial refutation front, I still recognize the tropes, such as the claim that there is a debate about the cyanide residues in the ruins of the gas chambers at Auschwitz. There isn't.

For instance, by referring to the "debate" about cyanide residues, you're referencing Fred Leuchter, the death-obsessed self proclaimed "expert" in methods of execution whose incompetent analysis of the walls of Auschwitz has fueled generations of Holocaust deniers. The bits about soap and lampshades are classic Holocaust denial, because soap and lampshades made of human fat and skin are not part of the historiography (as you put it) of the Holocaust coming from serious historians. So, no, if you dispel that "myth," it doesn't necessarily mean you are an antisemite or denier, but the way you brought it up is classic Holocaust denial. I've seen it many, any times. Ditto your question about "How many deaths can I subtract?" That's another classic denier trope.

Then there's this classic claim that history is so hopelessly politicized, with the implication that maybe Holocaust history is very, very wrong:

The truth behind WWII is there for anyone’s taking. It involves serious reading of many different historians, and not just the establishment historians because, let’s face it, history is a highly politicized craft and historians are often financially dependent on politicians and the patrons of biographies and such.

And:

Anyway, it’s not so cut and dry. We all know that certain lies have been placed in Public School textbooks and it is up to us to disabuse ourselves of those lies. Just the simple passage: “Columbus discovered America” is without a doubt the most outrageous thing you could write on paper.

Silly, silly. We're not talking about popular beliefs about the Holocaust. I'm not, at least. I'm talking about serious reading of multiple historians and, yes, reading "some of the primary historiography relevant to this time period," both of which I've been engaged in since I was in college in the 1980s. To what "historians" are you referring? David Irving?

The most painfully hilarious part is that they just *can't fathom* how this could be considered insensitive. And, good lord, Jake sounds like someone I know in real life - do they all recite from the same script? Tell me, Mr. Crosby, do you also hate Justin Trudeau?

And, well, huh. Gish galloping. So that's what it's called. Seems to be a favorite of the semi-educated, I've been buried in bullshit every time I try to argue any points.

Background which no one asked for: I'm an invisible minority. Dad's side of the family are Indian Muslims, but I'm as white as library paste, and if you can say with a straight face that you're sure that's not caused any problems for him, you are either naive, uninformed, or a douche. It started getting bad in 2001, of course - I got to be the audience to a gang of rednecks in a large truck hollering hateful things at my father on my 13th birthday, which was just lovely - but it's never gone away, just concentrated itself in the cracks.

As a result, I'm genuinely worried for my cousin, who left India for graduate school in America - he's on a very cosmopolitan campus but the fact remains that he is almost as alone as I am up here in the middle of whitebread Canadian Texas, only he can't blend in like I can. And also isn't in Canada. Carrying a firearm is legal in America, and in a city in a red state his chances of running into someone who is both armed and crazy enough to do something with that fact are non-zero. Worse, now that the Marmalade God-Emperor is making racism a-okay again, that terrible possibility is exponentially more likely than it was when I flew in to see him last fall. How the Actual Fuck is this okay?

@A Magnificent Sloth,

As a result, I’m genuinely worried for my cousin, who left India for graduate school in America – he’s on a very cosmopolitan campus but the fact remains that he is almost as alone as I am up here in the middle of whitebread Canadian Texas, only he can’t blend in like I can.

If things get dicey, have your cousin get across the eastern border to Bossier Parish, we'll be a safehouse.
I've already stared down a truck full of rednecks, they took one look at my rifle and decided to drive rapidly out of range. I'll lay in some additional provisions just in case.
I hope your cousin likes Italian!* ;)

*I actually cook in multiple cuisines.

When historians write about the great fall of Murka that began this month, I'm sure that some will reflect on how we had wasted so much of our national energy on the pursuit of stupid entertainment experiences that we eventually became stupid entertainment. I'm sure that some will write about how we become so callous to the suffering of others that we even institutionalized the infliction of suffering as a virtue and as entertainment. And I'm sure that some will write about how sadism trumped human virtues and allowed a clique of callous sadistic monsters to take over the reins of power.

Is there anybody in the house who has a remedy in their doctor bag for the sort of anomie that Murka is suffering from ? Any spiritual wisdom to cure this affliction? Those of us who still have heart and soul are trying to be decent to each other. Is there any way that we can get that to spread ?

Is there anybody in the house who has a remedy in their doctor bag for the sort of anomie that Murka is suffering from ?

Alas, I suspect only a major nationwide disaster would remedy what's wrong currently.
The upside and downside are the same, that disaster currently occupies the Oval Office.
Rendering it the offal office.

I think we all should take the time to read some of the primary historiography relevant to this time period.

As opposed to "secondary historiography"?

I think we all should take the time to read some of the primary historiography relevant to this time period.

You could start with interviews and memoirs written by eyewitnesses.

Louis Vecchi of Benicia, CA was a member of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment of the 101st Airborne. In an interview with Rachel Raskin-Zrihen of the Benicia Times-Herald, Vecchi described the Kaufering IV camp. The following quote is from the Times-Herald September 25, 2007 edition:

"It was the Landsberg slave labor camp (a Dachau death camp satellite camp)," Vecchi said. "When we got there, the people were practically dead from starvation. I know there are people who say the Holocaust didn't happen, but that's bull. I saw it."

Gene Cook was a soldier in A company of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment of the 101st Airborne Division. After fighting in the Battle of the Bulge, Cook's unit was ordered to Hitler's vacation home in Berchtesgaden, according to an article by Alex McRae and Megan Almon in The Times-Herald, published on December 24, 2007.

According to The Times-Herald article, on the way to Berchtesgaden, the soldiers of A Company "came across a strange complex circled with barbed wire. It was Landsberg, a satellite operation for the massive concentration camp at Dachau."

The following quote is from the article written by McRae and Almon in The Times-Herald:

Cook will never forget the sight. "I didn't even know what we were looking at," he says. "It took me a while to realize it was a pile of dead bodies."

The prisoners came out of their quarters, emaciated, filthy and disoriented.

"It was awful, "Cook says. "Some walked around like zombies. Some were so feeble they couldn't even stand."

The prisoners all begged for food. Cook gave one man all he had - a small piece of cheese - and the man said in English "You are God in disguise."

Look, I am not denying anything. I am just saying that the Pop Culture understanding isn't necessarily true.

I am a non-conformist, but not an anti-conformist. I just haven't read enough to say with certainty that "six million Jews were murdered with Cyklon B" when there are so many people challenging this.

I know that when there are a small minority of people really committed to changing a historical record, there is usually some truth to it. We all know that the official explanation of the JFK Assassination is outrageous. Here is Bertrand Russell in 1964 writing about the logical stupidity of the official narrative. Bertrand Russell was no amateur, he won a novel prize and coauthored Principia Mathematica with Alfred North Whitehead. In short, he was a professor's professor, a hard-headed logician with a dedication for facts:
http://22november1963.org.uk/bertrand-russell-16-questions-on-the-assas…

So, you want to call me a denier! Try to associate me with neo-nazi's and crackpots because I understand the political bias of history?

The lies created by governments to sway the masses, to keep themselves in power, and to exploit native peoples?

So ORAC, if you have following the cyanide residue issue since it's inception,and if you have a Bachelor's degree in Chemistry as you say, then can you explain what happened?

Can you summarize the controversy?

I am a non-conformist, but not an anti-conformist. I just haven’t read enough to say with certainty that “six million Jews were murdered with Cyklon B” when there are so many people challenging this.

Another sure "tell" that you're a Holocaust denier. No reputable historian claims that six million Jews were murdered with Zyklon B. Jews were murdered by many methods. Victims were machine gunned in batches, shot in the head at the edge of trenches, burned alive while crowded into churches, gassed in vans or fake shower rooms, starved or frozen to death, worked to death in camps, or beaten or tortured to death. For example, the Einsatzgruppen (mobile killing squads) killed an estimated 1.3 million Jews and many tens of thousands of others just by rounding them up in occupied territories and shooting them.

As for the claims of Holocaust deniers that there was not enough cyanide residues found on the walls to be consistent with their being homicidal gas chambers, that's based primarily on the work of Fred Leuchter and has been debunked by more knowledgeable people than I:

http://web.archive.org/web/20150906001516/http://holocaust-history.org/…

http://web.archive.org/web/20150905054945/http://www.holocaust-history…

Wzrd1: Later, when news did begin to trickle past the censors, that feeling was verified by the popular demand, often repeated, to kill every German alive.

I can kinda understand; I don't know how one could live on that soil or on Polish soil and not feel the evil radiating from the ground. I still think they should have been forbidden from say, having museums ever again. They got off pretty lightly after World War 2.

AP: Just because they're trying to get cozy with Isreal doesn't make them not anti-semitic. It just means they hate Jews slightly less than they hate Muslims.

I still think they should have been forbidden from say, having museums ever again. They got off pretty lightly after World War 2.

Interestingly, had Germany gotten off lightly after WWI, WWII would have been unlikely. Between the Great Depression and the punitive measures Germany was paying in reparations for WWI, the misery directly helped Hitler rise to power.
Would we really want to try on WWIII for size with Germany at the heart of that, yet again? If so, should we then raze all buildings, enslave the women and children, then salt the soil, as the Romans were said to have done at the close of the third Punic war?
Or would the decaying radioisotopes suffice?

I think David Irving should be taken seriously.

He has had access to way more information and documents that just about anyone.

He is one of the preeminent WWII Historians, and was even considered so by the mainstream, until he started writing about historical facts antithetical to the Mainstream Holocaust Model.

The pseudoskeptics, establishment historians, and some Jewish people in the media have been smearing his character ever since.

This has nothing to do with racism, and nobody should be called and anti-semite. This is just a matter of the historical record. Nobody, not even most of your so-called "deniers", are racist Nazi's.

The fact is, nobody here was around to count the bodies. I think it is healthy to be skeptical of this "6 million" figure.

Does anyone here think they know more than David Irving? Seriously?

Well, let's see. Germans were crazy about record keeping. Remains were found in phenomenal numbers, as the crematoria could not keep up (per the logs), the ash residue is fairly standard per adult human and the amount of ash measured.
Fresh cyanide was found in the "showers" by elements of the 101st airborne, counting two of my uncles who were present to liberate several camps.

So, all of those eye witnesses were liars, deciding to repeat some mythical official lie, a lie documented on our classified networks and survivors also managed to repeat the same lie, all for generations.

The US is infamous for the inability to retain any secret, it always ends up getting out. The Manhattan project had daily reports going to Stalin. Our allies, even today complain that any secrets that they share with us, Congress gets and that same day, they're in the press.
But, somehow, that secret, over many thousands of men and women all was kept.

Ha.

Haha.

Hahahaha.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

David Irving should be taken seriously?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Thanks for the laugh. I needed it given what Trump's been doing since he took over.

SteveP: Those of us who still have heart and soul are trying to be decent to each other. Is there any way that we can get that to spread ?

Leave the States and go work for NGOs or local do-good associations elsewhere? That's what I'm going to try to do. There aren't any good people in America anymore. That's done. Trump's made us all into monsters.

Rhodes Jerk: Hey, what do you call Anne Frank's Diary? If that's not a primary source, I don't know what is. And then there's all the other letters, interviews, videos, etc. There are these fascinating things called library catalogs, and most every city has these cool new things called museums. If you can't find a primary source, that's only because you haven't LOOKED, klanhead.

AR: I know that when there are a small minority of people really committed to changing a historical record, there is usually some truth to it.

Nope! Wrong. They just don't WANT the holocaust to be true, because then they'd have to admit that they're nazi scumbags.

The 'historiography' solecizing was enough, Fυcklesworth.

Ii would like to draw people's attention to the fact that what Alistair Rhodes is writing is sadistic. The insensitivity in his discussion of the brutal murders of vast numbers of people shows that something inside of him is broken. It appears that he enjoy hurting others. He has a disease which makes him easy to hate, but I think that we should see past that and see that, more importantly, his disease makes him pitiable.

OMG. What is wrong with you?

This is a simple matter of historical record, don't pathologize accurate bookkeeping.

Something in your brain is broken, some part of your temporal lobe. The logical center, wherever that may reside, obviously has problems.

Well this website certainly isn't a bastion for liberal conversation.

We have a Joker named SteveP who comes on with that annoying sort or armchair psychologizing that is usually reserved for people like Lee Harvey Oswald.

Just discredit people that don't swallow official dogma. Whatever.

I'll just say one more thing, certain intelligent historians have been vocal about certain errors in the historical record. They are persistent and then seem sincere. I don't think it is prudent to disregard every bit of information that does not conform to Pop History, especially if it comes from a well-read historian or a physical chemist.

It seems as if most people here just want to carry on this sort of charade: "I'm right because it's Pop History", "Whatever the people in power think, I will think what they want me to think".

Come to think of it, Narad rhymes with Charade,

Narad the Charade!

And wzrd1 just has one of those lazy and stupid screennames, something you would see on the leader board of an arcade game. Play pinball much wzrd1?
Pnbllwzrd1?

I’ll just say one more thing, certain intelligent historians have been vocal about certain errors in the historical record. They are persistent and then seem sincere. I don’t think it is prudent to disregard every bit of information that does not conform to Pop History, especially if it comes from a well-read historian or a physical chemist.

Do tell. Tell us these "certain errors in the historical record," with sources.

No one is "disregarding every bit of information that does not conform to Pop History," but thanks for the further tell that you're a Holocaust denier. I think you're doing my readers a service by showing that Holocaust deniers still exist and that they use logical fallacies and distortions of evidence in much the same way antivaxers, creationists, 9/11 Truthers, and the like do.

"I’ll just say one more thing, certain intelligent historians have been vocal about certain errors in the historical record."
[CITATION NEEDED]

"They are persistent and then seem sincere."
[CITATION NEEDED]

"I don’t think it is prudent to disregard every bit of information that does not conform to Pop History, especially if it comes from a well-read historian or a physical chemist."
[CITATION NEEDED]

"It seems as if most people here just want to carry on this sort of charade: “I’m right because it’s Pop History”"
[CITATION NEEDED]

"“Whatever the people in power think, I will think what they want me to think”."
[CITATION NEEDED]

Nobody was around to count the bodies? Sounds a bit like the creationist I had an argument with. Apparently you can't prove the Earth is 4 billion years old because no one was around to see it.

Here is a short paper by Dr. Rudolf (Doctorate in Chemistry from Max Planck Institute) on the iron cyanate traces in the walls of the purported delousing chambers and in the purported extermination chambers.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v20/v20n2p-3_rudolf.html

And...there's now no doubt that this is a Holocaust denier! Citing the IHR, one of the oldest and most influential bunches of Holocaust deniers out there? Yep. Holocaust denier.

Same old Holocaust denier pseudoscience.

http://web.archive.org/web/20150906001516/http://holocaust-history.org/…

http://web.archive.org/web/20150905054945/http://www.holocaust-history…

Alistair Rhodes:
"purported delousing chambers and in the purported extermination chambers."

Orac:
"Our first Holocaust denier. No, no, don’t try to say otherwise. I’ve been doing this nearly 20 years, and, even though I’ve been out of action in the Holocaust denial refutation front, I still recognize the tropes, such as the claim that there is a debate about the cyanide residues in the ruins of the gas chambers at Auschwitz. There isn’t."

SteveP: his disease makes him pitiable.

And that right there is why the Democrats lost. Pity is a weak emotion; actually ALL emotions are weak, except for anger.

Wzrd1: But people can live without museums and culture, right? That's a pretty mild punishment. Heck, I'd be all for applying that to the red states- no museums ever, have fun with Ham's dismal anti-amusement park.

AR: Oh,grow up, nazi. Learn to use a library catalog. And yes, I'd certainly pit myself against Irving, who's just a sad stupid little man, who decided to spit on his profession and use his degree as toilet paper and got roundly, deservedly, humiliated. There's nothing wrong with my brain. You might want to get yours checked.

OMG, it's as though the ADL has sent an army of trolls here.

Whatever.

We all see what happens to people who question the Holocaust. It's seems as though David Irving is the only one who hasn't been physically assaulted.

I am going to violate Scopies Law here, just to spite you people!

http://whale.to/b/attack_revisionist_q.html

But seriously, there are people who are committed very strongly to maintaining the Holocaust Idea, whether it be accurate or not. This is not me to say. All I am saying is that the views of certain historians should be taken seriously. These men are serious, have PhD's, and are intelligent.

Sure, all of the neo-Nazi's can go to hell. I don't like bigots and racists either.

I like science and real history. I feel insulted by Lollipop History and you should too!

Hmmm. Who, I wonder, is "committed very strongly to maintaining the Holocaust Idea, whether it be accurate or not"? It wouldn't happen to be...the Jews...now would it? I mean, the mention of the ADL is kind of a big tell, you know. Again, I've been at this nearly 20 years. I know all the tells, the bit about "some people" being committed to the idea of the Holocaust even if it might not be true is a big one. Couple it with insinuations about the ADL, and it's a near 100% accurate identifier of a Holocaust denier.

Alistair Rhodes:
"Here is a short paper..."
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v20/v20n2p-3_rudolf.html

"The IHR does not “deny” the Holocaust. Indeed, the IHR as such has no “position” on any specific event or chapter of history, except to promote greater awareness and understanding, and to encourage more objective investigation."

"IHR NEWS AND VIEWS"

"Real Politics Is Not a Game: The Stubborn Reality of Jewish-Zionist Power"

"Atzmon, MacDonald, Weber Address Spirited Meeting in S. California
Three noted writers and activists --- Gilad Atzmon, Kevin MacDonald and Mark Weber -- addressed a spirited, successful meeting on October 1 organized by the IHR at a hotel in southern California. About 80 men and women gathered for thoughtful, provocative talks on the formidable role of Jewish-Zionist power in political and cultural life"

NEWS AND COMMENT

"Three Jewish Moguls Among Eight Who Own as Much as Half the Human Race
D. J. Solomon – Forward (New York)
As the world’s mandarins prepare for their annual reunion in Davos, Switzerland, the British charity Oxfam is calling attention to income inequality by pointing out that eight billionaires — three of them Jewish — hold as much wealth as the poorest half of the Earth’s population. In their ranked list, headed by Microsoft founder Bill Gates ($75 billion), the Jews come in at six, seven and eight. "

IHR Store
"The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering"

"The Young Hitler I Knew"

"The Myth of German Villainy"

Support the Work of the IHR

"Please also consider a bequest to the IHR in your will. Your thoughtfulness now will help to keep the IHR fighting for truth and freedom for years to come."

"Week after week, we reach activists, students, educators and opinion-makers with solid information and sound perspective on World War II, American history, the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Zionist push for war, the ongoing turmoil in the Middle East, Third Reich Germany, Soviet Communism, Holocaust propaganda, the Jewish-Zionist hold on our cultural and political life, and much more."

"We can never hope to match our adversaries dollar for dollar, but we are able to reach a large, global audience, bypassing the media masters who try to control what we see and hear."

IHR EVENTS

"• Defying Threats, Irving and Weber Address California Meeting
IHR Meeting April 2011
In spite of efforts by local bigots to disrupt the event, best-selling British author David Irving and American historian Mark Weber addressed a meeting in Orange County, California, on April 23, 2011. They gave talks on two of wartime Germany's most prominent leaders: Heinrich Himmler and Joseph Goebbels."

Links to Other Sites

Institute for Research of Expelled Germans -- Serious writing and documentation on the mass expulsion, mistreatment and “ethnic cleansing” of more than ten million ethnic Germans 1944-1949.

Alfred Lilienthal -- Informed ant-Zionist perspective on the Middle East, US-Israel relations, and more

The Scriptorium Archive -- Alternative, pro-German perspective on 20th -century history

BONUS:
"nce a prominent voice in extremist circles, the IHR has been on the decline, unable to publish its anti-Semitic Journal of Historical Review or sponsor major international Holocaust denial conferences since 2004. The organization still runs its website, where it peddles extremist books and other materials, and hosts some minor extremist gatherings. "

But seriously, there are people who are committed very strongly to maintaining the Holocaust Idea, whether it be accurate or not.
[CITATION NEEDED]

This is not me to say. All I am saying is that the views of certain historians should be taken seriously.
[CITATION NEEDED]

These men are serious, have PhD’s, and are intelligent.
[CITATION NEEDED]

I like science and real history.
[CITATION NEEDED]

AR: But seriously, there are people who are committed very strongly to maintaining the Holocaust Idea.

Maybe because it actually fucking happened and people need to know how and why? It's kind of funny to watch you try to reduce the Everest of evidence there.

AR: Sure, all of the neo-Nazi’s can go to hell. I don’t like bigots and racists either.

How many ferrets in your family tree? You are an insult to mustelids worldwide.

In this supposedly scientific blog, it is easier to bring Nazi ideas than to talk about x-ray induced carcinogenesis.

@Alistair Rhodes - Please explain to us, oh learned one, what the f*ck the exact number of people killed in the Holocaust or the exact chemical formula they were gassed with has to do with the topic of the post, which, in case you forgot, is the fact that the White House released a statement on Holocaust Remembrance Day that omitted any mention of the Jews, was informed that this was a mistake because, intentional or not, its a common dog whistle among antisemites and Holocaust deniers, and, instead of apologizing or acknowledging their error in any way, started whining about how they were just trying to be "inclusive" by ignoring the uncomfortably topical racial motivation behind the Holocaust entirely instead of, oh I don't know, mentioning both the Jews and the assorted other "undesirables" who were also killed. Protest all you want, the simple fact that you thought the most important thing to contribute to a discussion of the government's outright contempt for widely accepted norms pertaining to basic human decency was to fulminate against the "pop culture understanding" and "lollipop history" of the Holocaust pretty much tells us everything we need to know about you. Oh, and incidentally, you're not fooling anyone with your totally ironic and "just for spite" reference to whale.to, either.

Sorry Sarah, I was responding to the commentators, not ORAC's article.

Jews were put in camps, and that is horrible enough, but let's not lose perspective. Asian Americans were put into camps as well.

Just playing the devil's advocate. I don't like seeing people get swept into a whirlwind of patriotism and I don't like seeing commentators smearing David Irving.

Here is a good scientific article on prussian blue (iron cyanate) found in the delousing chambers and the alleged extermination chambers.

http://germarrudolf.com/germars-views/202-some-technical-and-chemical-c…

This man was imprisoned for this! For simply pointing out errors in the historical record. I think people need to let the revisionists make their case, they have something important to say.

Yawn. Same old Holocaust denier pseudoscience.

http://web.archive.org/web/20150906001516/http://holocaust-history.org/…

http://web.archive.org/web/20150905054945/http://www.holocaust-history…

Okay, screw Donald Trump and the Whitehouse for their omission and lack of compassion.

People should not be imprisoned based on their religion, race, or gayness. Even a flaming homosexuals should be treated fairly.

Alistair Rhodes:
"I don’t like seeing commentators smearing David Irving."

Southern Poverty Law Center:
"But since the 1980s, he has cultivated a reputation as the world's most prominent Holocaust denier, a status he cemented by suing Penguin Books and American scholar Deborah Lipstadt for libel in 2000 after Lipstadt wrote that he was a denier and a pro-Nazi ideologue. In a dramatic judgment, Irving lost his case and most of the considerable amount of money he made over the years selling his books. That, and his 2006 stint in an Austrian prison for denying the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz, have made Irving a hero in extremist circles. Any reputation he once had as a real "historian" has been wrecked."
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/davi…

"Here is a good scientific article on prussian blue (iron cyanate) found in the delousing chambers and the alleged extermination chambers."

[NOT A STUDY]

Alistair Rhodes:
"Okay, screw Donald Trump and the Whitehouse for their omission and lack of compassion.

People should not be imprisoned based on their religion, race, or gayness. Even a flaming homosexuals should be treated fairly."

THANK YOU!

I'll give Fendlesfroth +1 for trying.

1/10 is still just sad.

Oy, holocaust-denier boy: If you're going to take my name in vain, don't forget the apostrophe. Racist dickhead.

Yes, Japanese–Americans were put into concentration camps too during the war, which is terrible, but as far as I can tell they weren’t, you know, systematically murdered en masse the way Jews were on the other side of the Atlantic.

It was officially titled "The Final Solution of the Jewish Question."

I think that says it all.

And yes, I have read the first person accounts of now only the liberators of the camps, but also read the evidence collected and presented at the Nuremberg trials.

Funny how these Holocaust deniers can ignore the mountains of collected evidence and confessions of those who actually carried out the orders.

Wow. Those were some shit-brained comments. I'm racist now?

Here's your apostrophe Scopie ' .

Here's a few more: ' ' '

I'm not racist. I'm just saying that a few things could have been exaggerated, you know, the way that most Governments inflate their enemy's wrongdoings while mitigating their own. You know, standard nationalistic bias and such.

But anyone who questions the Holocaust gets brutalized. This is strange indeed.

Mass insanity I tell you.

But who is behind the "exaggeration"? Please, tell us!

most [...] inflate their enemy’s wrongdoings while mitigating their own.

But anyone who questions the Holocaust gets brutalized. This is strange indeed.

Mass insanity I tell you.

Heh.

I think you’re doing my readers a service by showing that Holocaust deniers still exist and that they use logical fallacies and distortions of evidence in much the same way antivaxers, creationists, 9/11 Truthers, and the like do.

ORAC, please. Just watch the video of Building 7 collapse. NIST even measured the roofline to have descended at free-fall acceleration for over two seconds.

And Niels Harrit, Professor of Chemistry in Copenhagen, actually found traces of a nanothermite composite in the dust. This was nanosized aluminum and iron oxide in an ethylsilane polymer matrix.

Obvious controlled demolition. Listen to the great chemist Niels Harrit and watch the video!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWorDrTC0Qg&t=7s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I51fDKsuJ_I&t=1629s

A 9/11 truther too?

Why am I not surprised.

And of course, this scientific paper. This was peer reviewed. Read this ORAC, as a chemist you should have no problem reading this somewhat technical paper:

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

Niels Harrit
Stephen Jones (of cold fusion fame, remember?)
et al

Blow me Lawrence. Free-fall acceleration means that all of the columns were severed nearly simultaneously.

You simply cannot get that with a small office fire. Sorry, you lose.

Obvious controlled demolition Lawrence.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/willyloman.wordpress.com/2009/08/23/more-b…

@ Lawrence
"A 9/11 truther too? Why am I not surprised." He's tolerated here only because he does not believe in x-ray induced carcinogenesis.

And the best, unanswered question the 9/11 Truthers never address, why?

Why building 7 and not all of the other buildings.

Oh, and there was that high-rise collapse in Iran....by fire alone.

Why am I not surprised.

Indeed. I'm waiting to see how far the crank magnetism goes.

Seriously Lawrence, you can't win here. You back to YouTube where you can brainwash the kiddies with that trash.

Any sane and intelligent person who watches the Building 7 collapse video will know that it was brought down by a controlled demolition.

You are just doing propaganda; damage control for the real criminals.

Okay, looks like ORAC went full propagandist. Why am I not surprised?

Reading straight out of the playbook of culturally-sanctioned ideas he doesn't have the balls to admit the truth.

He knows. Most people know. They pretend that they don't, but they do.

Very amusing. You can't refute a single statement or fact I relate. All you can do is whine and dissemble.

Thanks for the apostrophe Alistair.

*nods*

Are your bonkers views your own, or were they implanted in your rectum by aliens? Oh - and as a matter of interest, do you live in a US state that begins and ends in a vowel?

Oh, the childish insults....

Run along little boy, real adults are speaking here.

Since you already cited whale.to, we know exactly where you are coming from.

De-remembering the Jews from the holocaust is extremely...... different... and different in the same way that what happened to Germany in the 1930's and 1940's was..... different.

The American "civilization" is extremely.... broken. Some major nutrient is missing in the development of ... bullshit detection. Phony experts of all sorts abound..... side lining actual real life experts. It is all about creating impressive...... displays. A neotenized public has failed to develop critical thinking. It has caught a lethal disease.

The reptile brain resides in front of a video screen.

Don't be a douchebag Rich.

The most hard-headed scientist can examine the WTC 7 collapse and the physical evidence and come to the conclusion that it was a controlled demolition. There is nothing flaky about it.

Quite the contrary actually.

Watch the video of the collapse. You can see where the charges are set off. Keep in mind that it is impossible for a small localized fire to cause a symmetrical collapse at free-fall acceleration. Impossible in more than one way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mamvq7LWqRU

Now the Holocaust thing, I am not too sure about. I haven't read much on that. I just saw a few David Irving lectures and he seems truthful, but I cannot say for certain.

But I am 100% certain that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition. There are scores of scientists, with doctorates, who know this as well and are not afraid to speak out.

ORAC is a James Randi fanboi.

And that's all I needed to know that this is likely another Fendlesworth sock, along with the other comments with penis jokes. Buh-byyye.

“Three Jewish Moguls Among Eight Who Own as Much as Half the Human Race"

This part is true, as there were three Jewish moguls who definitely had a recipe for world domination.

http://www.threestooges.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/TTS-Wallpaper-3-…

Ah! I see! Evidence by YouTube!

Fail.

It's a thirty second video clip douchebag, and it doesn't matter what website it's posted on. The content is the same.

Obvious controlled demolition Scopie!!!

Obvious troll is obvious.

No kidding - jeez, I've seen these wackos for almost 16 years now (longer for the other conspiracies they usually believe in).

Of course, the troll will try to derail the conversation into its favorite pet theory (9/11 being this ones').....

I bet you didn't even know that Soylent Green was made from people.

You're a joke Lawrence. Watch the video. If you think that a small office fire did that to the building, then you are an idiot.

A cretinized cretin, a mongoloid from Mongolia.

Second Godwin's law: as an online discussion on Hitler grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving 9-11 approaches 1.

Again with the childish insults - oh, so the last bastion of the kook.

As for a "small fire" the one that afflicted Building 7 was neither small, nor of short duration....

These conspiracy theorists can't ever get their facts straight.

It wasn't small? It was of long duration?

Then what about this!

http://i.usatoday.net/news/_photos/2009/02/09/chinafirex.jpg

This buildings structure remained undamaged. They rebuilt it using the original frame.

I started to suspect as much, pretty early on.

Very sad & so out of touch with actual reality.

I can't help but note he seemed quite familiar with Holocaust denial tropes. I was having acid flashbacks to my time on alt.revisionism in the late 1990s refuting Holocaust denial.

Denialists, in general, seem to have a hard time actually answering the question of "why."

Of course, if they answered truthfully, they would expose themselves as the kooks and anti-semites that they actually are (or racists, bigots, etc).

They try to couch their complaints in terms that appear to be rational, but at the end of the day, it is merely a cover for their true beliefs.

This certainly applies to the likes of Trump and Bannon (and Miller too) - they want to appear mainstream, but they most certainly are not.

a mongoloid from Mongolia.

Vile racist troll is vile racist.

AR: Asian Americans were put into camps as well.

And if you'd lived back then, you would have been one of the racist yahoos trying to lynch the nearest Japanese family.
By the way, nice fail at pretending to have compassion for gay men and lesbian women. Here's a hint: if you object to being considered a racist right wing prick, maybe you shouldn't act like one.

SteveP: please don't post while on mind-altering substances.

Re ORD@34 - this is way, way, back, but I think the term genocide was coined to describe the mass murder of Armenians by Turks in WWI. The Armenians have a claim to our Never Forget as well.

Idjit:1. Soylent Green is fictional.
2, Harry Harrison stole the idea from Arthur Clarke.

@PGP - "Soylent Green is people" is an artifact from the film, not the original book. That's never even implied in "Make Room! Make Room!"

AR have you ever spoke with a vet that liberated one of the camps? I have. Have you ever spoke with a survivor of one of the camps? I have. I actually have spoken with more than one in each category. If you had ever spoken with people that had been there, you wouldn't doubt the holocaust.

I even am indirectly part of a genocide. A long time ago, I was on a rafting trip where a grad student from Rwanda fell out of the raft. He wasn't a good swimmer and didn't have a life jacket on. As he went by, I plucked him out of the river probably saving his life.

This grad student later went home and helped murder at least 75,000 men, women and children. I always wonder what would have happened if I hadn't plucked him from the water.

Rich Bly

Jesus that's awful. I hope you don't blame yourself. You couldn't have possibly known. The decisions he made were his own. His evil is his, not yours.
Hitler was famously spared in WWI...just saying.

TX, I don't blame myself for what he did. I would blame myself if I hadn't saved him. But sometimes it makes an interesting what if thought train.

Rich Bly

I'm glad to hear it, I'm sleep deprived, so maybe I took it wrong.

"I don’t blame myself for what he did. I would blame myself if I hadn’t saved him"

That, my friend, is integrity. Good on ya.

But sometimes it makes an interesting what if thought train.
I see your point...I was just...concerned. That's a traumatizing thing.

A long time ago, I met a professor who was the mentor for Charles Taylor, the notorious Liberian politician / warlord.

This was before what happened there, but I always wondered what he thought about Taylor's subsequent life & if he thought he might have been able to push him in another direction, had he known what was going to happen.

Rich Scopie: I am aware of that, yes. Actually, the film is really astonishingly different from the book that I got confused on the first readthrough, since they appeared to be two different entirely unrelated things. But the idea was still Clarke's.

While I am loathe to wade into this topic since pretty much everyone trying to raise questions or point out a different viewpoint does so with ulterior motives, I do want to take exception with the idea that the Holocaust was purely aimed at the extermination of the Jews. It was aimed at all perceived enemies of the Nazi regime, of which Jews were absolutely one of the largest groups, but also included a very large number of political opponents and other "subversive" races.

My big example is the internment and murder of socialists, communists, trade unionists, and other left-wing political elements. They were the first to be sent to the concentration camps years before Hitler's anti-Jewish laws went into full effect. Even the popular song Die Moorsoldaten that is sung at Holocaust memorials and Jewish remembrances was written by people arrested for being trade unionists long before the Jews were being sent to the camps. And that's without even touching on the millions of Poles and other Slavs targeted for ethnic cleansing, the persecutions of the gay and Roma population, and so on.

Again I don't want to come across as casting doubt on the horrors inflicted on the Jewish population by the Holocaust, or that they made up the largest number of those killed, or deny that they were targeted because of anti-Semitic paranoia aimed at destroying them. I can see how coming up against the usual Holocaust denier claims can focus the attention on what happened to the Jews, but that misses that the Nazis had plenty of hatred to dole out in broad strokes as well.

I also don't want this to be interpreted as supporting Trump in any way. On its face, the idea of being "inclusive" in discussing the other victims of the Holocaust is commendable, but by how Trump went about it it's obvious that was not his goal. He didn't want to educate or expand knowledge about the event, he wanted to go into as few details as possible simply to send a knowing wink to his political allies that want no mention of it at all. It is the fallacy of the "'all lives matter" mentality that tries to deny bias when it is so plainly there. We should be remembering the victims and being inclusive by discussing all of them, not discussing none of them like Trump is doing.

You are right about the origin of the word "genocide". Having learned that Rafael Lemkin, who coined the word, was a Jew, I assumed it was first applied to the Shoah.
The Turkish genocide against the Armenians had an indirect role in the Holocaust. Hitler is claimed to have said, "Who today remembers the Armenians?", proving that Never Again has to be more than a slogan to make us feel righteous while doing essentially nothing.

You gonna write about the 16 countries that ban Israeli Jews – including six of the seven countries on the travel suspension list?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_passport#/media/File:Visa_require…

The Nazi's did kill a lot of people - both by design and as part of their normal way of doing business.

However, the Wannsee Conference made it abundantly clear that the main focus of the Reich's efforts would be the extermination of the Jewish people.

Not at least highlighting this, as part of the commemoration, should be considered in the poorest of tastes (at minimum).

@BT:

One question right here: Who was the target of the Final Solution?

After all, it wasn't the Final Solution of the Communist, trade unionist, Roma, Jewish, and general enemies of the state Problem. It was the Final Solution of the Jewish Problem. The others were all ancillary, while the "Jewish problem" was central. Hitler didn't exterminate the trade unionists he sent to the camps. True, many of them died because conditions at the camps were horrible, but they were targeted for punishment, not extermination. Ditto Communists. Jewish persecution began very soon after Hitler took Power. For instance, the first general boycott of Jewish businesses was ordered a mere two months after Hitler took power. A week later, he banned Jews from the civil service and the practice of law and a few days later imposed economic sanctions on Jews. Violence against Jews began before the Nazis even took power, being a feature of the activities of the Brownshirts. Basically, the Jews were the target before Hitler took power, were targeted immediately after Hitler took power, and were such a central focus of Hitler's priorities that considerable resources were diverted from the war effort to carry out the Final Solution. When the Nazis met at Wansee, it wasn't to discuss how to get rid of the Communists and trade unionists in the Reich. It was how to get rid of the Jews.

As for Communists, as I noted above, Hitler conflated Jews and Communism, frequently referring to "Jewish Bolshevism" or "Judeo-Bolshevism." As I wrote above (and you appear not to have read):

I can't help but note here that those who seek to minimize the centrality of the Jews to the Holocaust sometimes like to point out that Communists were also targeted, but such an argument conveniently neglects the way that Hitler conflated Jews and Communism, believing Communism to be a product of Jews and frequently invoking “Judeo-Bolshevism” as the enemy of the Germany people. This is a common conspiracy theory that views Communism as a Jewish conspiracy, positing that Jews dominate and control worldwide Communist movements.

To Hitler, Jews and Communists were more or less the same thing.

I get it. The Nazis did horrible things to a lot of people. They persecuted and killed a lot of groups. But central to that persecution were always the Jews. Hitler constructed his machinery of death for one purpose: To exterminate European Jewry. That he also used the same machinery to kill his other enemies doesn't change that, nor does acknowledging the centrality of the Jews to the Holocaust minimize the suffering of others targeted by the Nazi regime.

Also, The Gnat is very good at non sequiturs.

Depressing to see someone who had so much promise squander all that promise to become a disgusting, racist, antivax, vicious Gnat lacking in anything resembling critical thinking ability. In my opinion.

And someone who will always have the ability to hide behind his parent's money & never have to get real, gainful employment either.

If Young Mr. Crosby is so concerned, perhaps he should write about it on his own blog.....

BT: Many Jews were among the Moorsoldaten. Jewish intellectuals were especially targeted.
The main reason that anti-Jewish laws were rolled out in stages was because so many Jews were woven into the fabric of German society. It was necessary to marginalize them, make them invisible first, to reduce any sympathy people might have had. Some Jews were spared because of their occupations or individual skills, others because they had powerful protectors in the regime - Hermann Goering protected the doctor who tended his wounds after the Beerhall Putsch as one example.

"Jews were put in camps, and that is horrible enough, but let’s not lose perspective. Asian Americans were put into camps as well."
I have known people who were in one kind of camp or the other. The biggest difference is that the Japanese-Americans came in through the gates and left through the gates. In the Nazi camps Jews came in through the gates and never came out again.

It's depressing to see so many otherwise intelligent people who are willfully ignorant of the lessons of history.

I have seen people note, and I am inclined to agree, that the rise of right-wing nationalist movements in the West at the same time firsthand memories of World War II are fading is not a coincidence. Anyone who was a soldier in that war and is still alive is in his mid-90s or older. My mother is just barely old enough to remember some of the home front aspects of the war, e.g., saving fat from cooking to be sent to a central location where it would be converted into war material. She's in her late 70s. The perspective is much different for younger people who know this history (to the extent that they do) only from history books and stories that their parents or grandparents told them. And remember that by "younger" I'm including people up to age 75.

One of the trolls above mentioned primary sources. One reason we know as much about the Holocaust as we do is because the Nazis themselves kept meticulous records of what they were doing--they expected future generations to thank them for what they did. If Facebook or Instagram had been around at the time, no doubt many of the concentration camp guards would have posted selfies with corpses, just as many present day dumb criminals post selfies of their crimes on these platforms (making it that much easier for the cops).

History shows how easy it is to use hate and fear to do evil.

On my father's side of the family, all six uncles were in WWII (dad was in Korea). In a conversation with one of my uncles, we talked about his experience in fighting the Japanese in the Pacific. I said something about the Japanese never surrendering and he said that was bull. He stated that we just never allowed them to surrender.

Was my uncle an evil man? No. He was a man filled with hate at the time.

So see how easy it is for evil to creep in through the window.

Unfortunately, with the IDIOT in DC, I can see this country repeating history in very evil way.

@ Orac re # 158

in your list of adjectives describing the gnat you left off
* Trump worshipping*

Thank you in advance.

Worse, because unlike say, Germany, we are the most powerful country on the planet - by a wide margin. Even though other nations have nuclear weapons, none of them would actually use them to try to stop us, because they'd know that our retaliation would obliterate them from the map.

If Trump & his ilk decided to go to war, there is little to nothing that anyone could do to stop him. At this point, neither the Constitution or the War Powers Act has done anything to prevent past Presidents from using the military in whatever way they felt was appropriate.

Even the Bushes, at their worst, were still moral men who thought they were doing the right thing. In this case, Trump is not a moral man, nor would he ever do the right thing.

And that terrifies me.

Has anyone seen the latest Executive Order drafts floating around?

The first states that immigrants on Federal assistance could be deported and the second sets a "means' test" for all new immigrants - baring their entry if it is felt that they would require public assistance, at all.

What has happened to this country?

Eric Lund: I have seen people note, and I am inclined to agree, that the rise of right-wing nationalist movements in the West at the same time firsthand memories of World War II are fading is not a coincidence. Anyone who was a soldier in that war and is still alive is in his mid-90s or older.

Heck, some of those who were alive in the '40s voted for Trump, regardless. One of my uncles, the oldest, lived through the war as a kid, and he voted for Trump. (Well, for Stein, but the outcome was the same.) I don't think I'll be speaking to him again.

@ Lawrence:

And it seems to be getting worse day by day.

It looks like a few states are taking steps to counter his actions- NY, WA, CA- ( Port Authority of NY/ NJ)

You gonna write about the 16 countries that ban Israeli Jews – including six of the seven countries on the travel suspension list?

I hate to break this to you, Jake, but Pepe the Frog isn't going to give you a hummer no matter how hard you try.

Now, howsabout that PNAS paper?

And it seems to be getting worse day by day.

I have heard reports that federal marshals in California are not enforcing the federal court injunction issued there. I also saw an item on the BBC website that a Muslim athlete from India (not one of the seven countries on the list) who is scheduled to compete in the world snowshoeing championships may be unable to attend because the US Embassy in Delhi is refusing to issue him a visa.

On the plus side, in addition to the states listed @168, attorneys general in MA and VA have announced action against the travel EO. And at least two Republican senators (Collins of ME and Murkowski of AK) have announced their intention to vote against confirming Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education.

Whoa. That's good news, if true. Peel off one more Republican, and DeVos is toast.

So Jake says it's OK for us to have a Muslim ban (but only those that don't do business with The Donald), because, hey, they did it first to someone else. And here I was, thinking' we were suppose to be the good guys of the world, and set the standards of how a country should operate.

But, still, therein lies a tale.

Back in the day, I traveled a lot for the military, and carried an official passport. But the situation (back then at least) was even worse than Jake says it was. If you had an Israeli stamp in your passport, you wouldn't even be allowed into most Muslim majority countries.

The solution for us was simple. After you made a trip to Israel, once you returned to the States, you would be issued a new second passport, that you would only use for travel to those countries. Problem solved.

So I wind up in Israel, and while we're there, they say 'Guess what? We want you to stop in Morocco on the way back'. We noted our passport problem, and they said they had a solution.

Issuing us diplomatic passports would have been easiest, but we didn't qualify, and the State Department takes that serious. So what they did was send us to the Consulate in Jerusalem (not part of Israel, remember) and issue us standard civilian tourist passports, because they can't issue official passports at a Consulate.

So me and a couple other guys fly out of Ben Gurion Airport to Paris, use our new blue passports to transit to the airplane to Morocco, and show up at Morocco with 3 fresh, consecutively numbered passports, issued in Jerusalem, in civilian cloths, but with military IDs in our wallets, a second Israeli stamped red passport in another pocket, about 30 boxes of equipment, and we look the immigration/customs guy in the face and say 'nothing to declare'.

And we got away with it.

Yeah, we had US Embassy staff at the airport to meet us, and they may have greased the skids a bit, I dunno, but they were on the other side of the wall, and the Moroccans on our side of the wall had guns. I'm not ashamed to admit I was more than a little apprehensive standing in line.

You gonna write about the 16 countries that ban Israeli Jews – including six of the seven countries on the travel suspension list?

Let me swat down this piece of false equivalence. The countries in question have had this rule in place for years. They don't issue visas and then turn around and say, You can't enter the country because you are from a certain other country. Nobody is being turned back at the origin/transit airport, or detained at the destination airport, because of this policy.

That's not what happened with the travel ban EO. The rules were changed abruptly at about 18:00 EST on Friday, 27 January, such that people who had actually been issued visas, or even green cards, were not allowed into the United States. People who were issued permission to enter the United States, some of whom were actually en route to the United States, were suddenly being denied permission to board flights and being detained if they arrived in the US. Now, I won't deny that the US has the right to cancel visas and green cards for cause--but in the US that's supposed to mean something the traveler actually did, not just that the traveler happens to be from a certain country.

One of the reasons this rule is bad for business is because businesses don't like it when rules change in an arbitrary and capricious manner like this. If you know that certain company representatives can't visit your clients in a certain country because the representatives are Israeli Jews, you deal with it by sending a different representative. But if your negotiator could visit the United States yesterday, and a new rule is announced that he can't visit the United States today, then you are that much more likely to decide that doing business in the US isn't worth the hassle. That includes people looking to import goods as well as export goods. For instance, if you are an airline and you are not sure your pilots would be able to travel to Everett to take delivery of that new 777, you are probably going to order the A340 instead, because you have no similar doubts about your pilots being able to travel to Toulouse.

Really? Simply omitting specific reference to Jews amounts to denial these days? This is not the tribute you like so you attack it. I agree that not saying something can be saying something but this seems a bit nit picky.

SteveP @82: You said "The insensitivity in his discussion of the brutal murders of vast numbers of people shows that something inside of him is broken."

This was exactly (if less eloquently) the argument I made about the 9/11 truther a few months ago. (And then AR showed himself to be that too.)

These denialists are cruel in the extreme, but either unwilling or incapable of physically hurting people (which is fine) so they go after the one group that can't fight back: the dead. How pathetic is that?

Not only do they go after the dead, but they also go after the remaining family members (see Sandy Hook).

Remembering the Holocaust is not a bad thing.
But the Jewish Holocaust represents only 50% of the non-combatants murdered by the Nazis.
Who is mentioning the remaining 6 million victims? Can we remember them as part of "the Holocaust", or do Jews wish to insist on complete ownership of that term and the events it describes?

Meanwhile, Stalin's deliberate and systematic murder of civilians represented 125% the scale of the Nazi murders - from 1 million Kazakhs to 3.3 million Ukrainians in 1932-33.
Who remembers them?

You know, Alistair, I want to thank you, buddy. I've just made my way through this whole comment thread, and I am grateful to you for illustrating so beautifully how dangerously insidious anti-Semitism can be.

You began this discussion by trying so, so hard to be reasonable and "just asking questions" and "playing devil's advocate," and you ended it foaming at the mouth about how 9/11 was an inside job and defending David Irving.

Listen for the dog whistles, people. This is what's hiding beneath the surface.

Peel off one more Republican, and DeVos is toast.

DeVos’s ethics agreement does not require her to divest from Neurocore, a company that purports to use biofeedback techniques to help children and adults overcome the effects of conditions such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism. The company says that its approach can improve patients’ sleep, mood, focus and school performance.

She has invested between $5 million and $25 million in the company, according to her disclosures. Patru declined to directly address questions about potential conflicts of interest related to Neurocore.

Which is to say, DeVos is an autism scammer on top of all her other scams.

I don’t like seeing commentators smearing David Irving.

Me, I would very much like to see David Irving spread thinly across a wall or other surface.

Bertrand Russell was no amateur, he won a novel prize

My admiration for Bertie borders on idolatry, but there is no gainsaying the fact that when he tried writing fiction it was a complete load of pants.

@Craig - "Final Solution to the Jewish Problem."

I think that says it all...

HDB @177: I drove past a building the other day that had a sign that loudly proclaimed "Naturopath, acupuncture, colonic" treatments for autism. Right there on the sign, in letters a foot tall. No beating around the bush, no euphemisms.
So it doesn't surprise me at all that anyone as brazen as DeVos would be scamming the parents of kids with autism.

I have a colleague with a brain injury who uses Lumosity to try and not lose any more brain function (and because they're bored). I don't have the heart to tell this person that it's bunk. I mean, better than YouTube, right?

Lawrence @181: It's also like Craig's never heard of or seen any memorial to any of the soldiers who died in WWII. Isn't there even a memorial to all the people in London who died during the Blitz?

Orac should have paid more attention to his general inclination to distrust John Podhoretz.

It simply doesn’t parse that Trump is a Holocaust denier. The news coverage of the kerfuffle played down The body of Sean Spicer’s defense of the adminstration, which, for once actually did make sense and is key to figuring out what might be going on here: Trump is poised to out-Hawk every previous adminstration in pro-IsraelLikud policy. Yam Head made Obama’s Mid-East policy and the Iran deal a key target in his campaign. He wants to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. His second favorite world leader after Putin is Bibi Netanyahu. (Where do you think he got the idea for a border wall?) The feeling is mutual. Trump-love on the Israeli right is so fervent, other Israelis are making messiah jokes.

Ivanka converted to Judaism to marry a descendant of Holocaust survivors. The Holocaust statement was written by Boris Epshteyn, “a strongly identifying American Jew, of Russian Jewish ethnicity, who is in the Trump inner circle and who is a descendant of Holocaust survivors.” [Rabbi Dov Fisher, Jewish Journal]. Trump’s Alt-Right mastermind, Steve Bannon, was, of course, very close to Andrew Breitbart, who was also ‘a strongly identifying American Jew’. The Trump gang are Islamphobes and institutional racists, not antisemites. Of course, Storm Front supports Trump. They know a fascist strong man when they see one, and they’re delusional on the rest of the facts. Trump never denounces anyone who supports him, and the neo-Nazis probably take that as an endorsement, which it’s not.

Please read Rabbi Fisher’s defense of Trump and Epshteyn: http://bit.ly/2jVnk0v
Now, I don’t share any politics with the players in this mess, but after doing a lot of fact-checking, I have to say they have a point, including a bit of (just on this issue) Sean Spicer’s ‘CNN is out to get us’. Read the first two sentences of the original statement again:

It is with a heavy heart and somber mind that we remember and honor the victims, survivors, heroes of the Holocaust.

It is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror.

I’ve put in a carriage return separating them visually, to show that they are in fact about different things denotatively. As Podhoretz, Lipstadt, and McPhee all observe, the term “Holocaust’ was “coined to describe the uniquely Jewish aspect of the Final Solution.” It is not, and never has been a synonym for ‘all the atrocities of the Nazis’. It’s hardly unreasonable then, to imagine Epshteyn thought his first sentence was indeed about the Jews and nobody else. The second then, is a very vague, and truthful, acknowledgement that Nazi depravity and horror was directed at some people who weren’t Jews. He didn’t name any of those groups either. He was trying to keep the statement short, and the reason the Holocaust reference is so brief is that the statement isn’t about the Holocaust, it’s about Trump. It references the non-Jews “who risked their lives to save the innocent” because that’s what Trump is claiming to be: “to do everything in my power to ensure that the forces of evil never again defeat the powers of good [to] make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world.”

Excuse me while I go throw up. As a number of previous commenters have noted, this statement was issued on the heels of the anti-Muslim travel pan. Coincidence? I think not. Making love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world? Well, Epshteyn’s the surrogate the Trump campaign sent out to claim the Trump Foundations’ purchase of a giant Trump portrait to hang in a Trump Hotel was “absolutely proper” because the hotel was doing the Foundation a financial favor by providing storage space for Foundation property. To steal a line from Doc Holiday in Tombstone his hypocrisy knows no bounds.

‘But, but, but…’ you may be thinking, ‘Hope Hicks said specific mention of Jews was left out of the statement intentionally, because “we are an incredibly inclusive group and we took into account all of those who suffered.” What about that?’ Well, Hope Hicks didn’t say that. She did not, as Orac reported “take to the air to lay down the obfuscation”. CNN had asked for a comment on the criticism of the Holocaust statement by the Anti-Defamation League that had been circulating on line, to which Hicks replied, apparently in two different emails. Her emails avoided answering CNN’s questions directly. The first was just a forworded statement from Ronald Lauder of the World Jewish Congress that read, in part:

It does no honor to the millions of Jews murdered in the Holocaust to play politics with their memory. Any fair reading of the White House statement today on the International Holocaust Memorial Day will see it appropriately commemorates the suffering and the heroism that mark that dark chapter in modern history.

The second email apparently began with the now-infamous ““Despite what the media reports, we are an incredibly inclusive group and we took into account all of those who suffered.” Hicks isn ‘t quoted as saying anything about Jews having been ‘left out’, much less ‘Intentionally’. The “because” was an inference by Jake Tapper of CNN, whose story is the only available primary source on what Hicks wrote, and which all the other stories about Hicks’ comments have relied on and referred to – including re-phrasing Tapper’s “because” into “intentionally”.

So, what’s really going on here? Is this a case where the Trump team assigned the statement to a prominent Jew who crafted a sincere and appropriate statement, only to run afoul of other overly-sensitive Jews, or who may want exclusive ownership of Nazi victimization for some reason. No. As I’ve already observed, Epshteyn’s statement isn’t sincere. It BS about the greatness of Donald Trump. And the complaints can also be explained in large part by concerns about Yam Head that have nothing to do with the Holocaust or anti-semitism.

Parts of the larger context here are rifts in the American Jewish community, between the ADL and the hard core conservatives on one hand, and within the conservatives on the other. The ADL, not surprisingly, is worried about Steve Bannon. All of the conservatives, though, are down with the Donald on his Islamophobia, as it dovetails with his and their support for as much anti-Arab aggression, repression and West Bank settlement building Bibi could ever dream up. However, the neo-con contingent represented by Podhoretz (and backed financially by Sheldon Adelstein) take issue with Trump’s Jews on two points. The first: [maybe you guessed it] Putin and Russia. Epshteyn is unusual among American Jews in being an overt Putin fan. You may have guessed the next bit, too. He stands to make a small fortune if the sanctions are lifted and the Russian deals he has a financial stake in go forward. The other reason the neo-cons don’t like Trump: they think he’s a loose cannon and are worried he’ll somehow screw the pooch so massively U.S. support for Israel with suffer, or he’ll make other trouble for Bibi without intending to.

So my hypothesis for the whole scenario goes like this: Epshteyn tries to turn the Holocaust anniversary into a celebration of Trump as savior of the Jews, champion of Good over Evil, bringer of peace and tolerance replacing violence and hate. The ADL, being aware of the religious bigotry of the Muslim ban and Bannon’s alt-right connections – and not knowing Epshteyn was the author – is incensed at the posturing, and attacks Trump for ‘softcore Holocaust denial’ because that will ‘play’ to their audience. Jake Tapper, no friend of Trump, picks up on the ADL critque and ask for a comment from thew White House. The job gets handed to Hop Hicks, because eveybody who matters in TrumpLand is busy with the real work of Muslim bans and trying to get Jeff Sessions, Steve Mnuchin, Tom price and Betsy Devos past the Senate. Hicks, essentially exactly the sort of incompetent amateur Podhoretz imagined, in way over her head, attempts to reply to Tapper by emailing him things other people have written or said and otherwise avoiding the question. The only instructions she has from the higher-ups is ‘don’t tell them the President had it ghost written by Boris!’ Tapper tags her ‘inclusiveness’ comment to the ‘Why no mention of Jews?’ query she didn’t answer, and gins up the “because” peg for the headline and lead.

This gives the already-concerned Podhoretz more ammunition for his goals: ginning up a media distraction from the Muslim ban, because the demonstration are confirming his worst fears that Trump’s heavy-handedness is going to backfire and mess up their mutual MidEast agenda. Finally, Reince Priebus goes on TV, and being the doofus he is, mangles his restatement of the ‘We were inclusive’ line (perhaps letting slip a wee bit of Wisconsin brand unfamiliarity with and antipathy toward Jews) does actually refer to the various non-Jewish targets of the Nazis as being victims of the Holocaust. (So, so, stupid…) Story blows up, Spicer screams at the press about Trump’s love for Israel replacing Barrack Hussein Obama’s betrayal of Israel, but the press only reports he called criticism of the Hollocaust statement “pathetic” and “just ridiculous”. Which leads to even more bad press for Trump, at which point the White House leaks Epshetyn as the author to try to chill down the stink a bit…
____

* The article on other victims of the Nazis to which Hicks referred Tapper doesn’t ‘bemoan’, and in fact begins with an explicit statement that there was something very “special” about the scale of the Nazi genocide of the Jews. i had included details in this comment but have deleted them for length. Check the link.

I respectfully disagree.

It is quite possible that members of the Trump Administration dislike Jews as much as they dislike Muslims.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Sheldon Adelstein

sb Sheldon Adelson.

I think it is very easy to over-analyze anything from Captain Kumquat (or Kaptain KumKwat, if you prefer).
Senior Co-President Bannon surely would point out to him that the base dislikes pretty much every identifiable group targeted by the Nazis, and fairness, a well-established priority, would require that none be mentioned specifically, unless all were mentioned. Mentioning all would bring the length of the press release perilously close to, or even past, the limit of the attention span of Kaptain K.

Here is a little poem that the non-racist Irving composed, then taught to his young daughter:

"I am a Baby Aryan
Not Jewish or Sectarian
I have no plans to marry-an
Ape or Rastafarian"

No doubt his desire for his daughter not to marry an "ape or Rastafarian" is motivated by a heathly fondness for historical inquiry. It couldn't be racism.

@Wzrd1 - Not gonna lie, I'd be _much_ less concerned if he WERE in Texas; we have an uncle there.

He's in Florida, where I grew up. That's why I'm so scared.

Also holy goddamn jeez. What the shit is this holocaust denying bullshit?

It's just Trump doing a Trump.
You know, pull a howler, while the press is going, "Oh, look! A shiny", he's pulling something dastardly with the other hand.

"Simply omitting specific reference to Jews amounts to denial these days?"
It has always amounted to denial. In Kiyiv German troops massacred tens of thousands of Jews in the Babi Yar ravine, covering the bodies with dirt. Others would later be murdered there.
The Soviets tried and failed to eradicate the ravine itself, damming it and pumping into it the waste slurry from brickworks (The dam collapsed and the ensuing mudslide killed over a thousand.). Commemorating the murders there meant recognizing the slaughter of Jews in particular.
So yes, it is a form of denial.
The Nazi genocide held a unique place in the German murder program. Jews died first. Jews had to be completely and mercilessly exterminated just for the crime of existing. No other group in that time was singled out for so much attention from the murder regime. This was true even in the camps. To illustrate their thinking, take just one of their crimes. After the Battle of the Bulge, Jews were singled out from the rest of the American POWS and sent to be worked to death digging tunnels in hard rock. Realizing they didn't have enough Jews, only then did they pick out others who they thought looked Jewish or had names they considered Jewish. Last, the quota was filled out with anyone they thought was a troublemaker. That was always the pattern. First kill the Jews and then they would see about killing others.To show how deep was the madness, the digging was continued even after the program the tunnels were for was stopped, just to keep on punishing the Jews and alleged Jews. In their sickness, even while being pushed out of Libya, they managed to dedicate resources to find and kill the Libyan Jews. In the Channel Islands, part of the UK, they went after the tiny Jewish community there, all to send eight Jews to be gassed.
Yes, failing to remember the Shoah is a form of denial.

fuckelsdolt returns

Yeah, Doug, I'm thinkin' you might be right, and hoping I'm wrong about that.

Clearing out a troll infestation, then a new poster shows up with a not unreasonable post, only to turn out to be said troll? That's only happened more than a dozen times so far.

My comment regarding the creep came in in a place different from what I expected. #190 ('zaar) is the target.

I also forgot to include the link to Mike the Mad Biologist who suggested the use of "co-president Bannon".

Jews died first. Jews had to be completely and mercilessly exterminated just for the crime of existing. No other group in that time was singled out for so much attention from the murder regime.

It is from a sense of gentle correction rather than mindless pedantry that I remind you of the Aktion T4 Rid-the-Reich-of-useless-mouths program.

In the Channel Islands, part of the UK, they went after the tiny Jewish community there, all to send eight Jews to be gassed.

After the war, the history of collaboration in Guernsey required a fair bit of sweeping-under-the-table activity. It was not considered a good look.

So here is the way I see it, Larry...
An individual "A" comes to a science blog and hijacks it to educate the rubes who live there. The individual ( or group of individuals posing as an individual... or individual posing as multiple different individuals or whatever ) cites numerous "authorities" in the process of arguing against the zeitgeist of the science blog. Never mind that many of the people who come to the blog are themselves authorities or highly experienced in the fields in question. Never mind that any one of a number of bullshit detection systems shows that the cited authorities that "A" brings to the table are bogus and are bullshitters. The question is, why does ths person come to the blog, challenging everyone on it? And why do the educated people at the blog get drawn into the sticky mess that "A" has created to ensnare them?

Maybe the behavioral scientists in the audience would care to comment. My guess has to do with some sort of adolescent male drive to hurt other humans, a type of anti-social sadism. What do you think?

@sadmar:

As usual, you dumped more verbiage into a comment than I sometimes do in a whole post: 1,653 words. 200-300 more words, and you'd have an average-length Orac post. When I see that, I'm tempted to suggest that you do your own blog. In any case, Podhoretz aside (seriously, I could have left him out without changing the point of my post), I tend to side with Prof. Lipstadt, who knows Holocaust denial better than almost anyone, Gord McFee, a comrade from the trenches of alt.revisionism from 17-18 years ago who helped teach me about Holocaust denial, and my own nearly two decades of dealing with Holocaust denial than, quite frankly, you.

Be that as it may, one thing here. Many white nationalists actually don't have (much) a problem with a Jewish state. In fact, they point to it as an example of what they want. Just as the Jews have a homeland for their race (and, yes, they view Jews as a race, not a religion), white nationalists want a "homeland" for the white race. In other words, there is not necessarily a conflict between being a Holocaust denial and being supportive of the state of Israel, if anything because the modern iteration of white nationalists fear and detest Muslim more than they fear and detest Jews. An Israel for the white race is what white nationalists strive for, and Bannon is, without a doubt, a white nationalist. His fingerprints are all over this.

As for Jared Kushner:

http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.769017

Also, Richard Spencer loves the "de-Judaification of the Holocaust." LOVES it:

http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.768982

When a white supremacist tells you that he fully approves of a statement because it is, as Prof. Lipstadt would put it, soft core Holocaust denial that seeks to obfuscate the central purpose of the Final Solution, I tend to believe that the statement is soft core Holocaust denial.

The de-Judaification of the Holocaust is an intentional goal of white nationalists and neo-Nazis. It's possible that Trump blundered into it, but I see Bannon's fingerprints all over this. It accomplishes three goals: De-Judaifying the Holocaust and praising Trump and distracting attention from the Muslim ban announced the same way. Fortunately, it failed at its last goal.

Orac: Most of your post is right on the nose, but you appear to have accidentally fused Richard Spencer and David Duke together. They're two separate individuals- although they're both odious racists, so I can see how the mistake developed.

Momentary brain fart.

To the Herr Doktor who said:

My admiration for Bertie [Russell] borders on idolatry...

Now, the Principia Mathematica is a bit much for me. I am into Calculus, not symbolic logic. But I certainly might someday give it a go!

Did you read this article by Bertrand Russel by chance?

http://22november1963.org.uk/bertrand-russell-16-questions-on-the-assas…

Obvious troll is obvious.....

F*ckwit: Now, the Principia Mathematica is a bit much for me.

Newton wrote the Principia Mathematica. Someone's google-fu is weak. Come back when you grow up, kiddy troll.

Both calculus and the Principia Mathematica were invented by Sir Isaac Newton. A bit of historical trivia: Newton invented calculus in order to prove (in the mathematical sense) a specific point he needed in writing the Principia: that the gravitational force of a spherically symmetric mass distribution is equivalent, at all points outside said distribution, to that of the same amount of mass concentrated at the center of the sphere.

Both calculus and the Principia Mathematica were invented by Sir Isaac Newton.

Well, that's a different Principia. I'll go ahead and note that Russell and Whitehead ultimately failed. (The van Heijenoort volume is well worth having, BTW. Mine, unfortunately, was perfect-bound and is disintegrating.)

In other news...

Mike Adams ( Natuiral News)- in light of what occured at Berkeley- asks whether it's time for Trump to declare a national emergency and take over the 'leftist' media.

Gary Null insists that the CIA is 'hacking' his radio show.

I swear, I don't make these things up!

@ Orac:

The Haaretz editorial reflects the split in the American Jewish community I discussed. Haaeretz is a Labor-left paper, 'progressive' in current American terminology.

The way to create safety for the Jewish community is to join in solidarity with the other likely targets of a Trump Administration: Muslims, immigrants, women, people of color, and those living in poverty. In forming bonds of mutual support and protection, an alliance of American Jews and historically oppressed people is our strongest line of collective defense against the threats to come.

This is what I took to be animating the ADL critique of the statement, that it was code for concern over the Muslim ban rooted in "if they can do that to them, they can do it to us."

The editorial also notes that Kushner is Orthodox, and Orthodox Jews in general supported Trump, while Reform Jews overwhelmingly supported HRC. It's suggestion that Kusher is just a figurehead to give cover to Bannon's anti-semitism is pure wishful thinking. The first thing I saw in my news feed this morning was a story about how Bannon and Kushner are new BFFs, working together to create a new 'think tank' that may be intended to actually run policy while the traditional government agencies are maintained mainly for show. [tinyurl.com/zjbvqew]

Much if not most contemporary rhetoric on the Holocaust in both Israel and the diaspora is coded framing of the Palestinian problem. The long tenure of Benjamin Netanyahu and the Likud in controlling the Isreali government was secured by manipulating immigration policy under The Law of Return to swell the ranks of Orthodox voters who support Likud's hard line policies, including the wall and more and more settlements on the West Bank. When Haaretz says:

Donald Trump and his incoming administration represent the antithesis of the core Jewish values of recognizing the inherent human dignity of all people and protecting the most vulnerable in society.

you can scratch out "Trump and his administration" and fill in 'Bibi and Likud' and add 'Labor-Reform' before "Jewish values". Likud, after all, grew out of the quite different core values of the Irgun.

It's perfectly on point to critique Likud, and/or Kushner on their quasi-fascist politics. And it's perfectly on point to critique Kushner, as Haaretz does, for not denouncing the fringe anti-semites like Spencer riding the Trump train. However, the Orthodox right no doubt considers Spencer a useful idiot for imagining Trump's fascism will turn Nazi rather than Eretz Israel.

It's also worth noting that Bannon, like Breitbart before him, is a cynical Macchiavellian who doesn't believe most of the crap he publishes. The guys have massive egos, and believe they control the rubes who follow them like master puppeteers, and I'm not at all sure they're wrong.

As i alluded to above, Podhoretz critique of the statement is self-canceling. He asserts, correctly, that 'Holocaust' refers to the Millions of Jews who were executed or tortured in the camps in service of The Final Solution. It does not, and never has, referred to Nazi atrocities in general. Thus, when a Jew like Epshteyn writes about Holocaust victims, you simply can't assert he needs to spell out the definition again, or assume he's trying to de-Judify the term by emphasizing other atrocity victims under that rubric when he doesn't state that explicitly, and doesn't even mention any other categories of victims.

If were going to talk about 'things left out', I find it far more telling that the day after Trump issues his Muslim ban executive order, John Podhoretz wrote a critique of Trump supposed religious bigotry without mentioning that. Does anyone seriously doubt that the contemporary American parallel to the German anti-semitism of the 1930s is the Islamophobia of the Right. that if camps are built, they will be filled not with Jews, but with Arabs? Really...

I am not familiar with Professor Lipstadt, so I know nothing of her politics, and have no opinion on where she sits in all this. I do note however, that her characterizations of the HuffPo piece (http://tinyurl.com/otckcxg] on 'the other victims' is ludicrously unfair. It begins;

Six million Jewish people were murdered during the genocide in Europe in the years leading up to 1945, and the Jews are rightly remembered as the group that Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party most savagely persecuted...

The body of the stories details the experiences of 5 individuals, two of them Jewish women who received even more horrors because one had a history of mental illness, and the other was sent off with her identical twin to Mengele for his 'experiments.' One of the three non-Jews profiled is a gay man who was sodomized with a piece of wood inserted 10' into his anus, leaving permanent injury, and then forced to watch, along with the rest of the camp, while his lover was executed by being torn apart by attack dogs. i fail to see how telling his story amounts to 'softcore' anything.

The historical record here is pretty clear that while the Final Solution solution was indeed the Nazi's first and foremost priority for the camps, it was also only the first step in a much larger and more general radical eugenics program intended to produce and perfect an Aryan super-race. I sat in on a friend's European History class in the mid-70s, and I was struck by what the professor added briefly after a series of lectures on the horrors of the Holocaust. He said the Nazi's had no intention of shutting down the camps after the 'Jewish Problem' had been eradicated, that they had prepared an ordered list of who would be the next undesirables to be gassed, including people who were merely physically 'ugly'.

Isn't burying the idea that 'You could be next' as much a form of 'softcore' Holocaust denial as downplaying the centrality of the Jewish victims, a way to be blind to the lessons of the past? it appears to me that no one is more blind to the lessons of Nazi atrocities than John Podhoretz, or anyone else who imagines that in 2017 they apply only to anti-semitism, failing to recognize who is likely to fill any new camps that might be built.

[As a documentary film maker and teacher, I'll note two relevant and interrelated films concerning atrocities by Errol Morris: Mr. Death on holocaust denier Fred Leuchter, and Standard Operating Procedure on Abu Ghrahb.]

Addendum to previous comment:

In fairness to Prof. Lipstadt, I had not noticed the headline that appears on the HuffPo article when you scroll down the page. It's "The Holocaust’s Forgotten Victims: The 5 Million Non-Jewish People Killed By The Nazis". This certainly could be interpreted along the lines she does. However it does not at all fit the text or tone of the article. Few people outside of journalism 'pros' are aware that headlines are rarely written by the authors, but by 'page editors' in print, and 'web staff' online. i would guess that whoever created that headline was trying to 'punch it up' as click-bait, but I would agree it betrays a (likely unconscious) lack of sensitivity to the specificity of the Holocaust and appeal to subtle anti-semitic sentiments.

The Holocaust’s Forgotten Victims
An indicator, if nothing else, of the contempt that HuffPo headline writers feel for their readership.

I knew I shouldn't have responded. sadmar just launched another 1,200+ words of the same. I'll probably regret responding here, but I'll make my response even briefer.

As for:

The historical record here is pretty clear that while the Final Solution solution was indeed the Nazi’s first and foremost priority for the camps, it was also only the first step in a much larger and more general radical eugenics program intended to produce and perfect an Aryan super-race.

Yes, but the Jews were the only group whose extermination could not wait until after the war, whose extermination was so important to Hitler that, even as the Nazis were retreating headlong in the East and its cities were being decimated by US and British bombers, instead of forgetting about the Final Solution in order to try to fight the Allies to a stalemate and a negotiated peace, the Nazis redoubled their efforts to exterminate the Jews in one last spasm because Hitler feared that he was out of time.

Oh, and I'm very, very familiar with Fred Leuchter.

Is the guy I was mistaken for a holocaust denier? Okay, Hitler and the Nazi party intentionally murdered 6 million Jews in a concerted attempt to wipe the Jewish people out. They did it with horrifying and well-documented meticulousness, motivated by antisemitism and its attendant conspiracy theories, none of which were remotely true.

Many of the victims died in death camps and labor camps, often by starvation or gassing with Cyclon-B. The evidence for all of this is so overwhelming that there is no credible argument to the contrary, and people who suggest otherwise tend to do so because of their own antisemitism.

In the case of Irving, the paucity of his arguments and the racist motivations for them were uncovered in great detail in libel case he foolishly brought in the UK. That he lost the case, despite absurdly pro-plaintiff libel laws in Britain, shows how little support his arguments had.

The poem was one of the pieces of evidence they uncovered to demonstrate that accusations of white supremacist sympathies by Irving were factually correct, and thus not libel.

I strongly dislike holocaust deniers.

Of course i know Orac is very familiar with Leuchter. I was making a note to the general readership about the 'softcore denialism' of our atrocities by folks like Podhoretz and American conservatives – not that Democratic administrations were innocent, just pikers compared to Republicans who supported the Apartheid regime, the 'disappearing" of opposition in Chile after the CIA directed fascist coup of Allende, 'Death Squads' in any number of Central American countries and in Indonesia.

Orac #210 simply restates a point I fully agree with and have not contested: the primacy of the Final Solution, and it's 'special place' in Nazism. If he decries wasting words in this thread, he might chose to address the issue of the lessons of the Holocaust for Trump's America instead... assuming that is, that he disagrees.

"It is from a sense of gentle correction rather than mindless pedantry that I remind you of the Aktion T4 Rid-the-Reich-of-useless-mouths program."
Aktion T4, for those not familiar, was the program in which mentally or physically disabled people were quietly murdered on the grounds that they were "life unworthy of life". The family was told that their loved one was to be taken to a special clinic where they would receive treatment and the best of care. When the victims arrived at the "clinic" they were murdered by lethal injection. Sometimes encouraging letters were sent to the family for a period of weeks. Sooner or later they were notified that the victim had died of typhus or some other disease and the body cremated for hygienic reasons. Questioning authority was not generally part of the culture, so it pretty much went unchallenged.
The murder of the Jews and others involved the full machinery of the state - military, industrial, intellectual, bureaucratic. The details of how these were employed are easy enough to find, so I won't go into them. By contrast the murder clinics operated so far under the radar that some were still operating months after VE Day.

Also, When the first version of the Action T4 euthanasia program became known, Hitler stopped it, at least temporarily. Then, when it restarted, it was restarted in deep secrecy, and, unlike the first iteration, without an order signed by Hitler.

Sadmar, I like you, but in this case, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. The Trump administration is full of antisemites. Bannon is ambiguous, but I lean on the side of "yes," simply because he is who he is. Trump himself has made antisemitic comments (like about how the only guys he wants handling his money are short and wear yarmulkes, because all Jews are short and good with money, har har), so saying that he couldn't be antisemitic because Ivanka blah blah is sort of like saying he couldn't be a misogynist because he's married to a woman and has a daughter he appears to favour.

The Israeli right "likes" Trump, for a certain definition of "like" mostly because they hated Obama a lot. Netanyahu, as far as I can tell, doesn't actually like Trump either; he seems to be using him, which is about par for the course with Israeli pols and their American counterparts. (They're quite willing to suck up to Evangelical immanentize-the-eschaton types, for instance, because they don't believe that the Christian End Times scenario will ever happen, so why not get all the for-free out of them they can. The fact that the funnymentalist nutters might do something to hasten things along, shall we say, never seems to occur to them.)

And I agree with the majority opinion that this was definitely "softcore" Holocaust denial, although I'd like to point out to Orac, just because I'm persnicketty that way and in both target demographics, that the Jews weren't the only targetted group that couldn't wait until the end of the war, just the biggest. The Nazis practiced mass killing techniques on handicapped people which they then implemented in the Final Solution. Their rationale for expediting Aktion T-4 was that the "life unworthy of life" was using up money and resources needed for the war effort. The memorial to those victims only went up a few years ago.

I too could not find the issue until Orac pointed it out. I see why this has upset people, but I'm not upset. I think there were good intentions had in the phrasing of that statement, and that phrasing came across as insensitive and ignorant to some people. To call this "holocaust denial" is hyperbolic even if such denial exists on a spectrum, because it lumps in well-intentioned hapless persons (regardless if this truly was well-intentioned or not) with true-blood deniers like Alistair; everyone is thusly a "holocaust denier" even if by accident. Ignorant and insensitive? Sure, if that's your perspective, then I think that's a valid opinion. But I wonder who here is willing to give the White House the benefit of the doubt knowing who currently sits inside it working his executive order pen into overdrive.

Interobbang, Aktion T-4 was implemented years before the war, and had less to do with resources than with the Nazi, and pre-Nazi vision of a racially "pure" German race (I refuse to call them Aryan because they are not.).
Their racial imaginings were not just euthenic, eliminating by various means so-called racial inferiors, but eugenic as well. The Lebensborn project had two arms. One was the provision of a sort of resort where pure "Aryan" women could go to breed with members of the SS. You can imagine how that deteriorated pretty quickly.
The other arm was the kidnapping of supposedly racially pure children from occupied countries, Poland most of all. I worked with a Jewish woman who had been hidden in the Polish countryside with false baptismal papers. She had the requisite fair skin, blue eyes, blond hair, and was in good health. She was fifteen when Lebensborn took her and had her adopted by a Berlin family.
This was all due to a preoccupation with their perverted views of race. For some illumination, look up "vril". If you follow it down the rabbit hole you will get a better understanding of where their bizarre ideas came from. And if you use Bovril you may never look at it the same way again.

I ran across something today, which I unfortunately failed to bookmark & can't find again, claiming that the original statement contained specific reference to Jews but that the reference was removed by the White House. Whether this was done by the Supreme Satsuma* or his boss Bannon, I don't know.
Anyone else remember Howard Handupme? He seems like a good metaphor for BannonTrump.

*" One of the distinguishing features of the satsuma is the thin, leathery skin dotted with large and prominent oil glands..." (Wikipedia)

MJD says,

Autism symptoms improve after fecal transplant, small study finds.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170123094638.htm

Did you notice that this study was not double-blinded, and had merely 18 subjects?

Too bad for for those kids who would like a good medical excuse...

Chris @ 220

And the supposed improvements were "measured" using CARS, which I have ranted about quite a lot lately as not being anything like good enough for assessing autistic symptoms. It's not like there aren't better tools around than CARS, so why not use them?

Oh, and places too much reliance on parent report without that being backed up...

I could buy Trump and Bannon as harboring a variety of anti-semitic prejudices, but that's a far cry from imagining Epshteyn and Kushner participating in Holocaust denial. In saying the Trumpers aren't anti-semites I mean only that this is not an animating defining aspect of their character, which still leaves room for things like money manager stereotype.

I don't know what group Interobang is referencing that has a "majority opinion' the statement is "definitely softcore Holocaust denial", but it's no better than argumentum ad populum if true.

The argument that the statement is denialist is much weaker than the still weak arguments that the defenses from Hicks and Priebus dipped into denialist territory. It amounts to 'any reference to the Holocaust that does not overtly name Jews as its victims is denialist'. Which is pretty silly since 'Holocaust' means 'what the Nazis did to the Jews' and has only been used several million times to designate that without spelling out the definition.

If you look at the statement, and what stands out to you is this possibly innocent sin of omisssion, rather than the elephant-in-the-room whopper that Donald Trump is doing everything in his power to "make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world," you've either got some serious blinders or an ideological agenda that depends on denying the reality of Trumpism.*

Pure conjecture, but Podhoretz is close enough to Netanyhu that his denialism accusation could have been meant as a warning shot from Bibi across team Trump's bow, to which the Trumpers' 'not having that; sty in line' reply was Nicky Haley's settlement warning at the U.N. But then Haley also told Russia to get out of the Ukraine, so who knows what's genuine and what's orchestrated hand-waving distraction?

______

* Which reality is bringing back my clinical depression bad enough I might not be round here much for awhile... just might as in to soon to tell... I'm not guessing I'll need to be hospitalized or anything, just not particularly communicative...

Which reality is bringing back my clinical depression bad enough I might not be round here much for awhile… just might as in to soon to tell… I’m not guessing I’ll need to be hospitalized or anything, just not particularly communicative…

I hope you come out of it soon, sadmar. Keep your fingers crossed for me, too.

We've been dealing with that with my wife, a chronic pain patient.
The level of effort to manage it is akin to arm wrestling a tornado with one arm and an earthquake with the other.
Doctor had prescribed an antidepressant, for off label neuropathic pain control, which resulted in a brief bout of suicidal ideation, causing me to hide that medication and immediately report to doctor the effect.
Needless to say, doctor completely agreed and he's since held off on new antidepressants. I think we'll have to find a proper pain management practice to work with these issues.

Doctor had prescribed an antidepressant, for off label neuropathic pain control, which resulted in a brief bout of suicidal ideation,

I've been suicidal - off and on - since I was 14. The only thing keeping me from it now is the thought of what it would do to my mom and others. I guess I have some metaphysical worries too...

Post #220 is not me either.

I hope you come out of it soon, sadmar.
What JP said.

It sounds like the alt-right idiots are trying to claim credit for Trump (and taking advantage of Trump mistakes) in the same way left-wing idiots are trying to hijack the anti-Trump movement.

Sadmar: My sympathies, depression is a bitch. I'm so far keeping it at bay by reminding myself that I have to live until at least next June, but living for other people is sucking hard. I've kind of dropped out of communicating with other people who aren't related to me. Oh well, friendship and love are for soft people, and I'm not one of those. (And it doesn't help that I'm 90% sure one of my former friends is being impersonated by her mother on Facebook.)

Also, in my considered opinion, the treatment for depression is nearly as bad as the disease itself. SSRIs might work for other people, though.

Go away, Fendelsworth.

Should we respond to such a juvenile entry?
*Seriously*?! Should we also consider the town drunk as well, considering the counterfeit BS?
Blow away, clown boy.

JP: Huh? I haven't been hacked.

Orac deleted the comment where Fendelsworth was impersonating him.

Thanks guys. i'm doing somewhat better. I stopped watching the news. SSRIs (specifically Lexapro0' 'work' for me, meaning they stop the spiral down before it sinks below just good ol' misery. I'd been on a reduced dose for awhile, but last month my shrink had me go back up because I've developed trichotillomania (that's obsessive hair-pulling so you don't have to Google, in my case, chin whiskers). I'd probably have been way down sh*t creek this weekend if not for that. While they didn't stop me from hitting actual clinical-type depression this time, they probably helped me resume some kind of tentative functionality by this afternoon. I actually did some cleaning! I'm still worried that the awfulness of things will smash me down again. I feel totally helpless, and as rationally as I can parse it, I think the state of the country is just going to get ]worse and worse...

Fwiw, the only long-term side effect I get from the Lexapro is total libido erasure, and I'm old enough I probably don't have much of that left to lose anyway. In my experience, indviduals' reactions to any given anti-depressants – both benefit and side effects – varies widely. For example, while I'm OK with the Lexapro, Celexa, which is almost identical chemically, gives me the shakes really bad.

JP, I do have my fingers crossed for you, and you can add me to the mom and others,.'Cause you are one of the good ones, there's too few these days, and besides, we need the recipe tips. :-)

Try lotus stamens. Seriously.

@ sadmar:

Hope you're feeling better.

Pulling on chin whiskers may not be so bad after all- it'll make it look as though you are constantly carefully considering weighty matters ( I'm of course joking).

About the 'state of the country getting worse' I can certainly agree with you there- what a sh!t circus of ineptitude we've been seeing of late!
I am trying to look at it all from a position of enlightened disengagement- most of it will not truly affect me personally but I hate how his crappy ideas will hurt others when they have legal heft behind them. e.g. Supreme Court.
I try to imagine that comedy writers and investigative reporters will have great opportunities.

I am agreed about JP- she is quite the bees' knees.

I am also a fan of PGP - who has a way to go but perhaps has the right stuff as a sceptic - and I'll go out on a limb saying so although I acknowledge that she botches up the works with her hasty judgments and over generalisations - but hey, she's young and has time. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Rome wasn’t built in a day.

It didn't burn in a day, either.

It didn’t burn in a day, either.

You beat me to that one!

When I'm stressed, I literally start to sharpen the kitchen knives. The concentration needed to maintain the correct angle on the sharpening stone, while re-honing the knifes helps me refocus my mind and I get the added benefit of having sharp knives again in the kitchen.
Dull knives in a kitchen are quite literally dangerous, as they skip and catch on what you're trying to cut, resulting in accidental cuts.
Needless to say, when I'm sharpening those knives, the idiot box is turned off.

Of course, when I'm not stressed, sharpening the kitchen knives is a tedious chore.

Neither did the British Empire either.

I’d been on a reduced dose for awhile, but last month my shrink had me go back up because I’ve developed trichotillomania (that’s obsessive hair-pulling so you don’t have to Google, in my case, chin whiskers).

Oy, oy, oy. A friend of mine from grad school has this problem, except it was the hair on her head; it doesn't sound like any fun at all. I hope the higher dose helps.

in my case, chin whiskers

As it happens, I only pluck my ears (if I live long enough, I'll probably have great tufts) when waiting to see my shrink – "appointments" are rather nebulous at this hospital clinic, but I appreciate that he spends as much time as needed with each person.

Sadmar, let me recommend a book for you about trichotillomania.
It's called "The Hair-Pulling Problem." The author is well-known in the small field of psychologists who specialize in treating it, and is on the scientific board of the Trichotillomania Foundation. You cannot rely on medication alone to treat it, and as of now there is effective treatment but no cure.
Two disclaimers here. I have a related condition of compulsive skin picking,and it did help me some. Also, I am related to the author, but gain nothing from his sales.

ORD: My brother had some hair-pulling issues as a very small child. The pediatrician's solution was for him to get a buzz cut. That ended the hair pulling (although it transformed into pulling the fluff off stuffed animals). He didn't start it up again when his hair grew out.

I once had a cat that pulled much of his fur out whilst taking steroids for asthma. It looked like a Mohawk for a while.

He recovered.

My wife discovered this interview with Republican Senator and Presidential candidate Bob Dole.

https://www.nps.gov/nico/learn/historyculture/bob-dole.htm

It's worth listening to in order to hear him talk about working with Ted Kennedy to get the Voting Rights Act out of committee and passed.

Late in the interview he makes the comment that

"We're all Americans."

Such a contrast to Trump and the current batch of Republicans.

I even have nice feelings about the Bushes now that we have Trump. We could play a game of "never have I ever _____ before Donald Trump."

Yeah, I've been spitting ten penny nails since Conway blathered on about the "Bowling Green massacre".
The IED bomber who was arrested, tried and convicted in Bowling Green, KY had killed a half dozen of my friends in Iraq.
So, to hear her blather nonsense to acquire some political capital is extremely enraging to me.
I so very seriously want to go trip her with my cane!

Wzrd1:
"I so very seriously want to go trip her with my cane!"
Don't bother. She will fatally trip over her tongue soon enough.

True, but much less emotionally satisfying. ;)

Yep. Only victims of the Holocaust were Hebrew. No diversity at all. How racist, oops, wait a minute, mixing Leftist drivel.

The Norms of Society and Presidential Executive Orders UPDATE

gregladen — Mon, 30 Jan 2017 08:19:23 +0000

The Norms of Society and Presidential Executive Orders UPDATE

A brief update: This morning, Senate Republicans set aside the rules that say that both parties must be present, with at least one member, for a committee vote to advance a Presidential nominee for a cabinet appointment.

In other words, as outlined below, our system is based not only on enforceable laws but also on rules that only work if everyone involves agrees to not be the bully on the playground who ignores the rules. The Republicans are the bully on the playground.

The system requires honest actor playing by agreed on rules. So, without the honest actor, you get this. This fits perfectly with Trump's overall approach.

Democracy is not threatened by this sort of thing. Democracy was tossed out the window a while back when this sort of thing became possible, and normal. Whatever we see now that looks like democracy is vestigial.

Original Post:

The title of this post is based closely on the title of a statement posted by my friend Stephan Lewandowsky, representing the Psychonomic Society.

The post is the official statement by this scientific society responding to President Trump's recent activities, and it begins,

Last Friday was Holocaust Memorial Day, which falls on the day of the liberation of the Auschwitz Death Camp by Soviet troops in 1945. U.S. President Trump marked the occasion with a statement, although it omitted any specific mention of the 6 million Jews who perished in the Holocaust.

On the same day, Trump also signed an executive order that banned citizens of 7 mainly Islamic countries from entering the United States.

This order—at least initially—also applied to legal permanent residents of the U.S. (“Green card” holders), thus barring them from re-entry to their country of residence after a visit abroad, as well as to dual nationals if one of their citizenships is from one of those 7 countries.

I'm going to use this as a starting point to discuss the most important thing you need to know about the situation in the United States right now.

You know most resources are limited. We can cook along ignoring this for long periods of time, ignoring a particular resource's limitations, until one day something goes awry and that particular resource suddenly matters more and of it, we have less. So a competitive framework develops and then things happen.

It is the business of the rich and powerful to manipulate the world around them in such a way that when such a limitation occurs, they profit. Candidate Trump mentioned this a while back. A housing crisis is a good thing for a real estate developer. This is not because it is inherently good; a housing crisis can put a real estate developer out of business. But the developer who is positioned to exploit such a crisis, or any kind of economic or resource crisis, is in a good position when thing go badly for everyone else.

One of the long term goals of many powerful entities is to maintain working classes, or other lower classes of servitude, in order to have cheap labor and a market. This has been done in many ways, in many places, at many times. Much of our social history is about this. Many wars have been fought over this, and many social, cultural, and economic revolutions have occurred because of this.

And every now and then, a holocaust happens because of this. This is, in part, because of what I'll term as Mischa's Law. Mischa Penn is a friend and colleague who has studied race and racism across all its manifestations as represented in literature, but focusing on the Nazi Holocaust and the holocaust of Native Americans. Mishca's Law is hard to understand, difficult to believe, enrages many when they hear it, and is often set aside as lunatic raving. Unless, of course, you take Mischa's class on race and racism, get a few weeks into it, know enough about it. Then, he gives you the thing, the thing I call "Mischa's Law" (he doesn't call it that) and you go, "Oh, wait, of course, that's totally true." And then you get really depressed for a while, hate Mischa for a while, hate his class. Then, later, ten years later, a life time after you've taken the class, and you've graduated and moved on to other things, Misha's Law is the only thing you remember from all the classes you took at the U, and you still know it is true.

The fundamentals are always in place for Mischa's Law to take effect. Competition, limited resources, different social classes or groups, a limited number of individuals in power, etc. But we, in America, have lived in a society where checks and balances kept one ideology (including, sadly, my own!) from taking over for very long, and there is a certain amount of redistribution of wealth and power.

But over recent years, the rich and powerful have convinced the working class that the main way we distribute wealth, through taxes, is a bad thing, so that's mostly over. Social welfare has become a dirty word. The rich are richer, the powerful more powerful, and those with little power now have almost no power at all. But we still had a governmental system of checks and balances, so that was good.

But then the system of checks and balances got broken. In fact, the entire system of government got broken. Did you notice this? What happened is, about half the elected officials in government stopped doing the number one thing they were supposed to do, and this ruined everything.

What was that one thing? This: play by the rules.

Playing by the rules requires both knowing the rules and then making an honest attempt to respect them. Not knowing the rules is widespread in our society. I'm sure the elected officials know the rules they are breaking, but increasingly, I think, the average person who votes for them has no clue what the rules are or how important it is that they be observed.

Imagine the following situation. You go to baseball games regularly, to see your team play. Let's make this slightly more realistic and assume this is a Little League team.

One day a big scary kid who is a bully gets up to bat. The pitcher winds up, throws the ball. Strike one. It happens again. Strike two. One more time. Strike three.

But instead of leaving the batter's box, the big bully kid says, "I'm not out, pitch it again." The following several moments involve a bit of embarrassment, the coaches come out, some kids are yelling at the bully, one parent hits another parent, and finally, it settles down, but the game is ruined and everyone goes home.

Next game, same thing happens, but this time nobody wants a scene, so they let the pitcher pitch the ball until the bully hits a single. Then the game continues. But the next game, there are a few bullies, not just one, demanding that the rules be ignored for them, and some other players decide to ignore other rules as well, and pretty soon, there is nothing like baseball happening.

You see what happened here? I'm going to guess that you don't quite see the key point yet. The reason you leave the plate and go back to the dugout when you get three strikes is NOT because of the properties of matter, gravity, magnetic attraction, the unstoppable flow of water or a strong wind. You are not blown, washed, pulled, pushed, or dropped by any force back into the dugout when you get three strikes. You go back into the dugout because you got three strikes, the rules say you are out, right?

No. Still not right. You go back into the dugout because you got three strikes, the rules say you are out, AND THEN YOU FOLLOW THE RULES.

The Republican party, about half the elected officials, have unilaterally decided, in state houses across the country and in the Federal government, to stop following the rules.

A few years ago, in the Minnesota State House, a Republican representative made the clear and bold statement that he represented only the voters in his district who voted for him, and not the other citizens. He was resoundingly condemned for doing this, and he backed off and stopped talking like that. But over time, in state houses across the country, and in congressional districts, this increasingly became the norm, for Republicans. The rule is, of course, that once elected you represent all the people of your district. But more and more Republicans decided that this rule did not apply to them. They only represent those who voted for them. Now, this is normal in the Republican Party, and the first Republican President to be elected after this change said during his first news conference after his election, prior to his inaugural, that blue states would suffer and red states would benefit from his presidency.

I'll give you another quick example. In one of Minnesota's legislative chambers, the chair, who is from the leading party, has the right to silence any legislature who gets up to speak if the topic being discussed is not related to the matter at hand on the floor. So, the legislature is debating a proposed law about bicycles. The Democrats are in charge. A Republican gets up and insists on talking about his horoscope. The Democratic chair of the chamber says something like, "Your remarks are not relevant to the matter at hand, sit down and be quiet." Good rule.

Last time the Republicans were in charge in that Minnesota chamber, they did this to every single Democrat who stood to say anything about anything, including and especially the matter at hand. The Republicans disregarded the actual rule (that the chair can silence a member who is off topic) and misused the power (that the chair can silence any member) to their benefit.

Tump is not following the rules, the Republicans in Congress are not acting like a "check" on Trump, and we have seen government officials in the Executive branch, apparently, ignoring court orders.

Trump's executive orders over the last few days have been an overreach of power. For example, in its initial and badly executed form, his "extreme vetting" plan removed the rights of green card holders. Two different court orders neutered at least parts of this executive order temporarily, but it is reported that some officials, working for the Executive branches, ignored the court order. Since these are basically cops ignoring an order from a judge, and judges don't have a police force, there isn't much that can be done about that. Cops are supposed to follow the orders of judges. That's the rule. The only way the rule works is if the rule is followed. There is no other force that makes the rule work.

Trump's apparent abrogation of previous decisions on major pipeline projects was done without reference of any kind to the regulatory process that had already been completed. Regulations are acted on by the Executive branch, but they come from laws passed by Congress, and the whole judiciary is involved whenever someone has a case that there is something amiss. Trump's executive orders and memoranda related to the pipeline ignore all the different branches of government, departments, process, and rules of governing.

It would appear that Trump had brought together the two major changes in rule observation that have developed over the last 20 years in this country. First, like the average citizen (of all political stripes) he is ignorant of how anything works. Second, like the bully that stands by the batter's box, he shall not observe any rule that he does happen to find out about.

You see, for a United States President to become a dictator, he has to do only one thing: Stop following the rules. The US Court System, the Congress, and the Executive exist in a system of checks and balances, and that is supposed to keep everybody, well, in check. And balanced. But the Executive is the branch of government with multiple police and security forces, an Army, a Navy, an Air Force, Marines, and a Coast Guard. There is a rule that only the Coast Guard can carry out military-esque activities on US soil. But there is a mechanism for putting that rule aside. The President puts the rule aside. That's it.

We live in a world of limited resources, and a pre-existing system of inequity, class, and ethnic categorization that allows the powerful to exploit and control most everyone else. We live in a country in which a single individual can take over the government by getting elected president then ignoring the rules, whether or not he formally declares himself in charge of everything. There is no mechanism to stop this from happening. There are all sorts of rules in place to stop it, such as the political parties putting up qualified candidates, the electors making sure they elect a qualified candidate, the Congress certifying the election of qualified candidates. But those things did not happen, and we now have a man who by all indications intends to dictate, not lead, dictate not rule, dictate not represent. There is no indication of any kind whatsoever that we do NOT have an incipient dictatorship as our form of government right now, and there are strong indications that this is where Trump is going.

And this is where Mischa's Law becomes a thing.

"Racism, left unchecked, will eventually lead to holocaust."

The checks, they have been neutralized.

gregladen Mon, 01/30/2017 - 03:19

Tags

Anthropology

President Donald Trump

"That’s the rule. The only way the rule works is if the rule is followed. There is no other force that makes the rule work."

Read Terry Pratchett's Nightwatch.

The thing those breaking the rules is that their rulebreaking only lasts as long as we try to. And, from Nightwatch, without the consent of the people, the police are just a handful hiding behind a tiny tin shield. There's no need to shoot officers. Just march in millions,unarmed, and walk right over them.

There will be red pavement pizza left behind. And not a shot needs to be fired.

Your baseball game analogy has played out here in Michigan. Republicans passed several laws - mostly to allow them to remove democratically elected mayors in cities, but some others as well - and the public was able to overturn them. So - Republicans passed a law that said anything state government enacts that has an appropriate attached is not subject to the same voter approach. Pass a emergency manager law, with a $775,000 appropriation, and it voila - they win.

They've passed several things this way, including appropriations in the things they want to be permanent. The money is never used of course - it's all to get avoid the realities of democracy while paying it lip service.

There is a computer science term; Byzantine fault tolerance. It comes from the Byzantine Generals Problem.

Generating communication protocols so that communicating actors can achieve common goals even when some of the actors "fail" with arbitrary failure modes (become traitorous and work at cross-purposes to the common goals) is the goal behind Byzantine Fault Tolerance.

There are ways to do this, but if you have n traitorous actors, you need at least 2n + 1 faithful actors for Byzantine Fault Tolerance to work (with perfect communication structures). If you don’t have perfect communication structures, then you need more than 2n + 1 faithful actors.

I've never heard of Mischa's Law before. I don't know how sad it is that it seems like a simple matter-of-fact observation to me.

American democracy and whatever scraps remain of any belief in American exceptionalism will be put to their harshest test in living memory. McCarthyism and Woodrow Wilson's authoritarian trial balloons are starting to look like pale shadows compared to this Trump-GOP marriage of convenience.

But hey, it's only been a week, right? I'm sure every new administration has those awkward Constitution-shredding baby steps.

It might help if we use the term "Il Duce" when referring to Trump. The similarities between Trump and Benito Mussolini are scary: rule by fiat, nationalism, pushing the legislature aside, attacking the press, favoring the business elite, racism, protectionism and increasing tariffs, empowering the police, strong-man posture, cult of personality, etc.
So far there is a major difference between Trump and Il Duce: the latter emphasized territorial expansion. However, Trump is supporting it elsewhere (e.g., by Russia).

The fact is that since the collapse of feudalism the elites have fulminated about the upstart peasantry expecting equality under democracy.

All that's happened over the last century or so is that the political/economic eleites have used the media, technology, economic chicanery, and inherent human prejudice in (especially the uneducated) the average Joe and Jane Blow to reinstate a more subtle form of feudalism/slavery. And the (Machiavelian) beauty of it is that most of the incipient serfs/slaves voluntarily step forward to have the yokes reapplied, simply because they've been trained to do so in a process that Skinner would probably recognise and straightforward operant conditioning.

Unlike the awakening Muad'dib, most of the sleepers have rolled over and settled in to hibernate. As the saying goes, "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Trump is treading well traveled ground,.

Obama also issued executive orders that have been an overreach of power.

The one about not enforcing the law for 2 years against 16 year old children brought here illegally springs to mind.

The President has broad power over visas and immigration, executing the Congress's laws related to naturalization.

If he wanted to, he could legally order that ZERO visas be granted for some period of time.

Could Congress pass a law allowing everybody in the world to come to America and be naturalized - yes - they could.

Will they - no they will not.

But make no mistake - like the Senate giving up the right to filibuster nominees - the President's power was broadened quite a bit by Obama.

Trump is merely benefiting from prior President's actions and executive orders.

I guess Presidential overreach is in the eye of the beholder.

Well, at least we know why dick has never admitted his errors: he's been dreaming in his sleep for the last 8 years.

Magma #5 As calls for impeachment grow louder and more insistent expect Trump (Bannon) to amp up the racist etc. Executive Orders in order to to do as much damage in as short a period of time as possible. Once McConnell and Ryan feel no more can be done with that duo they will agree to impeach Trump and put Pence in his place and the war on America will continue.

RickA: "Obama also issued executive orders that have been an overreach of power."

No, that is not true. It is, of course, a current Republican talking point, but it is incorrect.

Another issue rickA is lying about? What a shock.

Doug, it also moves the overton window, even if it loses. All they have to do is proclaim "the other side" as hidebound by still having their leftist views, even though this insanity moved the rightwing waaaaay over to the right, even from teabagger norms.

Sort of the political opinion version of war's "Salami slicer" technique with a reboot leaving things not quite the way it used to be

Even if RickA's claim wasn't just another right-wing lie it would still be a tu quoque logical fallacy.

Shorter rickA: "government making it harder for people to access alternative energy is good, government working to help people I believe to be the wrong color or nationality is bad."

Shortest RickA: government doing anything to enrich RickA is good, no matter how many people get hurt.

Wow #13
Indeed it does. The GOP have been steadfastly moving that window to the right for the last 4 decades or so. What is called centrist today is well to the right of where it was in the 60's.

As an outsider I find it all rather hard to take in what has happened to the US. If there is a good thing to say about what has gone down in the first week of his reign it's that when he is impeached (or otherwise removed) the outrage will be lessened by all his voters that he has betrayed (see https://twitter.com/Trump_Regrets) for examples ) and maybe the US will not descend into civil war, or massive violent rebellion (I truly hope it doesn't but it's not looking good from the outside - but maybe that's just my natural pessimist nature speaking)

"it’s that when he is impeached (or otherwise removed)"

I would be amazed if he were to be impeached, given the level of Republican support.

And it would not be good if he were impeached: Pence, the current vice president, is a far more despicable person than Trump - and that is no small feat. He may currently have a hand in calling some shots but it is a secondary hand: having him at the helm would be catastrophic.

Reigns are for kings; dictators have regimes.

Greg #11:

For another point of view:

http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/19/10-ways-obama-violated-constitution…

I just spent the last day marveling at the conservative friends of mine on FB falling all over themselves to claim that Trump isn't doing anything that Obama didn't do, and in fact Obama did all this aggressive bombing of 7 countries, and ousted illegal aliens left and right issued bans on incoming immigrants and refugees, and here I am thinking "Wait! Isn't this the same guy that you just spent 8 years relentlessly attacking for letting immigrants swarm in and take our jobs, and was weak in the fight against ISIS ?". And now their 'Great Leader' is doing (according to them) the same thing and they are falling all over themselves in praising him for making us safer? WTF!

Defending the indefensible is RickA's pastime, and it's past time to shut such bullshit down. This is the warning shot before a direct assault on this country's Muslims, and such efforts must be resisted by any means necessary.

The federalist? jeezus rickA, why don't you just cite your favorite spots, breitbart and blaze.

What an ass.

dean #23:

I did say it was another point of view.

The point of view of 1/2 the country.

But please ignore it and pretend that your point of view is unquestionably correct and the view of the other half of the country is unquestionably wrong.

It worked so well during the election.

And it is so very amusing.

rickA, you are nothing if not consistently dishonest and a source of views that are repugnant to decent people.

Doug Alder at #10 - there seems to be a growing discontent with Bannon's access to, well, everything:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/30/steve-bannon-nsc-politi…

On Trump getting the boot and Pence taking over, it really isn't a sane solution. As others have noted the GOP today is so far to the right of the Republicans 40 or 50 years ago as to be unrecognisable as the same party. Even Adolph would be agog. All that Trump has managed to do it to set the bar so far subterranean that any lifting is seen as an improvement, even if the bar is still below the bottom of the San Andreas fault. See comment 7 above.

Several years ago I used to think that Australia under Tony Abbott was the worst to which a Western democracy could plumb, and that we were the laughing stock of the world. Well, Trump makes Abbott look good and GWB look positively sensible. And now I dare not suggest that it could be worse, because I wouldn't want to tempt fate and find out...

The establishment wing of the republican party (e.g. the ones who wanted DeVos in the education post as a thank you for the donations) are unhappy with Trump for not listening to anyone.

"dean #23:

I did say it was another point of view."

So is the one that says that Obama NEVER used the executive order powers.

The right has moved further right.

But the left has moved further left.

The center has grown larger.

You guys seem unable to look at an issue from any point of view but your own.

There are at least two points of view for any issue.

You can be far right (fiscally conservative and socially conservative).

You can be far left (fiscally liberal and socially liberal).

But you can also have some who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

Or fiscally liberal and socially conservative.

It gets even more complicated if you introduce more variables.

Most of the posters can only look at any issue from the fiscally liberal, socially liberal mindset.

Try to look at things from other points of view and you can get outside your bubble.

This tap dancing around fascism is stunning, even for a man as demonstrably bereft of intellectual integrity as RickA.

"The right has moved further right."

We agree.

"But the left has moved further left."

We disagree.

So we have agreement with the first, so we can settle that one on "The right have moved right", but since we haven't ascertained consensus on the second, it remains unproven.

RickA writes: "There are at least two points of view for any issue."

Yes, views on shape of the earth differ. This argument of false equivalence is really rather sad. Most questions do *not* have two legitimate differing answers. That's the whole point of the scorn heaped on Fake News or 'alternative facts.'

Yet you still go there. Color me unsurprised.

Kevin #32

Yes - I imagine the world looks very black and white to you.

Lets test that.

Which gender is XX?

Which gender is XY?

Can a person change gender with cosmetic surgery?

Can a person change sex with cosmetic surgery?

Do you think that the issue of abortion has more than one side?

Do you think the issue of the death penalty has more than one side?

Do you think that affirmative action is racist?

Do you think that suicide should be lawful for an adult of sound mind?

Do you think that doctor assisted suicide should be lawful for an adult of sound mind?

Do you think that it should be lawful for an adult to buy a 32 oz or larger soda?

Do you think that it should be lawful for an adult to buy cigarettes?

Do you think that it should be lawful for an adult to buy alcohol?

Do you think it should be lawful to marry more than one person at a time?

Do you think it should be lawful for an adult to purchase drugs for recreational use?

Do you think it should be lawful for an adult to sell consenting sex for money?

These are examples of issues which most people would find have more than one point of view.

Or do you see only one permissible point of view for each of these issues?

Bernard J. @ 26

Amendment 25 section 4 of the US constitution

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

With the above Pence could instigate a bloodless coup and I think he will just as soon as soon as Trump and Bannon have done all the damage Pence, McConnell and Ryan think they can get away with, and you know both Ryan and McConnell will be on board with that. That way Trump takes all the blame and Pence gets to be the US's first Dominionist president set to undo the separation of church and state.

RickA - how poor of a reader are you? Did I say there are *no* questions that one can't have legitimate differing views on? No. I did not.

You said *ANY* issue has two differing views. GHGs warm the planet. Please tell me the other legitimate view. Are you a skydragon or a slayer?

One issue that only has one legitimate view proves you wrong. Listing 20 dozen issues (out of an infinite number of issues) doesn't prove me wrong.

God I have to believe you are a moron.

Doug, Pence ousting Trump is something I shudder to consider. First, because if things reached that stage it would be because Trump has completely screwed the country (and quite possibly the planet), and second, for the reasons you give - the division between church and stage would surely begin to blur.

It's amazing that President Obama governed from right of center if the left has moved left.

Oh wait, that was rickA who said the bit about the left. That's why it is an immense piece of shit with no relation to reality.

Kevin, you know he is a climate change denier. Of course he'll give a nonsense answer to your question.

"RickA writes: “There are at least two points of view for any issue.”

Yes, views on shape of the earth differ. "

Not merely that, dick here wants to posit that "fromage" is one view of the shape of the earth....

"RickA – how poor of a reader are you? Did I say there are *no* questions that one can’t have legitimate differing views on? No. I did not."

But Dick has a different point of view.

"Dustpan", probably.

Kevin #35 says "GHGs warm the planet. Please tell me the other legitimate view. "

The other legitimate point of view if that GHGs slow the rate of cooling of the planet.

Troll.

Here is an interesting article for you guys:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/most-people-consider-themsel…

I know I'm morally superior to you because you are a liar, RickA.

An important story on NPR's Morning Edition today about why former U.S. security experts from both parties see Trump's order as potentially dangerous in the fight against muslims extremist and terrorists:

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/31/512592776/will-trumps-refugee-order-reduc…

That should have read 'muslim extremists'.

Well this

I know I’m morally superior to you because you are a liar, RickA.

and the fact that rickA's set of morals can be described as the empty set.

No, I think RickA's morals are centered around "anything that enriches RickA materially is good, anything that inconveniences RickA is bad".

We know from his own words that people have no value to him (beyond what he can squeeze out of them before throwing them away).

His concerns for the welfare of others, the earth, our environment, etc is the empty set, yes.

BBD thinks I am a liar.

I disagree.

BBD is entitled to his opinion.

dean thinks I have no morals.

I disagree.

dean is entitled to his opinion.

Kevin thinks I am a moron.

I disagree.

Kevin is entitled to his opinion.

My morals are to allow reasonable people to disagree, respect people's right to have a different opinion than my own and not name call.

I am content to allow readers to judge whether I am a liar, as BBD alleges, have no morals as dean alleges or am a moron as Kevin alleges.

I do certainly disagree with many of the positions of quite a few posters on this blog.

I continue to post because I think it is good for the posters here to be exposed to at least one opinion from outside your bubble.

The executive order this post refers to is not unconstitutional.

Not even the fired attorney general would go there.

She said there was a credible argument it was lawful - but said it was not just or wise.

Well, that is not her call and she got fired (a day or two early).

I look forward to continuing to engage on legal issues, climate change issues and social issues.

Willfully ignorant Confederate trash makes weekly appeal for continued "exposure" to his long-debunked contrarian talking points, while dismissing fascism as Constitutional.

News at eleven.

It's amazing how RickA manages to become the subject of almost every conversation here lately. He is the online analog of Trump (and will probably be delighted to read this. Sad!)

BBD thinks I am a liar.

I disagree.

I caught you out lying and lying some more just days ago and here you are, claiming not be be a liar (again).

What a stunningly dishonest little shit you are. To recap:

A flat-out lie exacerbated by the fact that I gave examples of sensitivity being defined as purely a radiative term without CO2 as a specific.

You are lying.

Never claim on this blog that you aren’t a liar ever again.

You are.

And:

It illustrates my point and demonstrates your error simultaneously and yet you still pretend that you weren’t wrong.

Well you were and it is proven beyond doubt to everybody watching. It is also proven that you will resort to any mendacity, however idiotic, rather than admit error.

You are a dishonest little shit. And we are not going to let you forget it.

Ever.

Amen.

rickA, you don't engage, you lie and misrepresent facts.
Reading your "reasoned arguments" is like listening to a crappy 3 year old scream that he wants ice cream and wants it right away.

I am content to allow readers to judge whether I am a liar, as BBD alleges

Demonstrates, RickA, not 'alleges'. Demonstrates.

I caught you out lying and lying some more just days ago.

And now you are lying to us all again.

It won't end well, you know.

"The other legitimate point of view if that GHGs slow the rate of cooling of the planet."

How is it legitimate?

Just your opinion?

christopher #50:

I am actually saddened by the attacks I experience on this blog.

Rather than simply disagreeing and moving on - the comments degenerate into mind reading, judging without any actual knowledge and name calling.

The comments would be far less voluminous without the groundless attacks on my veracity, morality and intelligence.

But many of the posters like to taunt me, call me names and judge me - rather than simply disagreeing with me.

That is on the posters - and I hope we can just talk and not attack in the future.

Wow #54:

No - my point of view is actually scientifically correct.

Ask any climate scientist.

GHGs don't actually warm, and any climate scientist will admit that.

What they do is take infrared radiation emitted by the ground and ocean, which would otherwise escape to space and reflect a portion of it back to the ground or ocean.

This insulation effect slows the rate of cooling, but does not actually warm.

Please check with any climate scientist and see what they say about my point of view versus Kevin's.

I think you will be surprised.

I am actually saddened by the attacks I experience on this blog.

Endless dishonesty and refusal to admit error is not endearing, RickA.

And nobody likes a troll either. Trolls who try to make an argument out of something that can be resolved in a single sentence, like this:

GHGs cause the planet to warm by reducing the rate at which it cools.

It's just more dishonest rhetoric from you.

That's why everybody reviles you. If the fault were not yours, the response would not be unanimous detestation.

RickA - I think you've proved my point - and BBDs.

You really are a pathetic excuse for a human being. And you know what, I partake in robust arguments, discussions, debates everyday and don't resort to ad homs - but you are the epitome of those who will lie, mislead, or otherwise deceive. Satan is called the father of lies and you must be number one son.

"No – my point of view is actually scientifically correct."

No it isn't.

"Ask any climate scientist."

I did.

Liar.

"I am actually saddened by the attacks I experience on this blog."

Because it;s all identify politics with you, there's no actual reality.

Only feels.

Kevin #58:

No - actually I have shown that there are at least 3 points of view on the issue of GHGs.

Yours, mine and BBD's nonsensical combination of our two views.

So your example of an issue with only one point of view was a bad example.

I don't engage in ad homs - you do.

Period.

More lies!

What exactly is 'nonsensical' about the statement:

GHGs cause the planet to warm by reducing the rate at which it cools.

What is incorrect?

Do tell me RickA. I so enjoy our more technical discussions.

BBD #62:

I understand your statement to mean that the thermometer reading goes up by slowing the rate at which it falls?

To me that is nonsensical.

No - the thermometer reading falls more slowly than without CO2. That is what slowing the rate of cooling means.

The thermometer reading doesn't go up.

To me, warming means the thermometer reading goes up, not down more slowly.

Perhaps there is more than one point of view on this issue?

Wow #59:

Who did you ask?

What did they say?

I understand your statement to mean that the thermometer reading goes up by slowing the rate at which it falls?

To me that is nonsensical.

That's because you don't understand the basics of physical climatology and should not be commenting about it on a science blog.

If you reduce the rate at which energy leaves the climate system while holding solar energy input constant, the climate system will warm up.

GHGs cause the planet to warm by reducing the rate at which it cools.

Perhaps there is more than one point of view on this issue?

No, you are just wrong. What I said is exactly correct, not 'nonsensical'. Will you now admit your error?

GHGs don’t actually warm, and any climate scientist will admit that.

Of course it is also incorrect to claim that GHGs have no direct heating effect. It is to ignore basic physics:

What Happens when a Greenhouse Gas Absorbs Energy?

Once a gas molecule has absorbed radiation from the earth it has a lot more energy. But in the lower 100km of the atmosphere, the absorbed energy is transferred to kinetic energy by collisions between the absorbing molecules and others in the layer. Effectively, it heats up this layer of the atmosphere.

The layer itself will act as a blackbody and re-radiate infrared radiation. But it re-radiates in all directions, including back down to the earth’s surface. (If it only radiated up away from the earth there would be no “greenhouse” effect from this absorption).

Will RickA admit this error?

BBD:

Here is my point of view.

Every day the sun's energy is absorbed the by ground and ocean under its rays. The ground/ocean emits some of the absorbed energy back in the form of infrared radiation.

At night, when the sun has gone down, the surface continues to emit infrared radiation and cools until thermal equilibrium is reached. The GHGs absorb some of the infrared radiation and re-emit it in all directions, so some is sent back towards the surface.

The surface is still emitting more than is being sent back towards the surface, so it is still cooling - but cooling more slowly.

Hence the analogy to insulation.

But the ground doesn't get any warmer from the re-emitted infrared radiation - it continues to cool, but at a slower rate.

That is how I see it anyway.

No, the dishonest little shit will NOT admit his errors. Instead tries to cover up with verbiage.

Here is my point of view.

Sod your POV. It's confused garbage, as just explained.

Fact 1 - this is correct:

GHGs cause the planet to warm by reducing the rate at which it cools.

Fact 2 - this is incorrect:

GHGs don’t actually warm, and any climate scientist will admit that.

Fact 3 - RickA will not admit errors and is therefore a dishonest little shit

My #66 was not written in response to your #65 - we cross posted.

My understanding is a bit different than yours.

I understand that when a GHG absorbs a photon of IR, it causes it to vibrate. Eventually it re-emits a photon of IR, and the molecule stops vibrating.

There is no requirement that I am aware of for the GHG molecule to strike another molecule and give up its extra energy kinetically. Molecules are hitting each other all the time - some without having absorbed an IR photon and some probably having absorbed an IR photon.

I see the absorption and re-emission of the photon as separate and unconnected from molecules hitting each other (whether they have absorbed a photon or not).

But that is based on my reading.

I am not a climate scientist.

But if you want to think I am a dishonest little shit - that is ok with me.

"If you reduce the rate at which energy leaves the climate system while holding solar energy input constant, the climate system will warm up."

Moreover, the moron-in-residence HAS NO CLUE how those gasses reduce the cooling.

BY WARMING THE EARTH.

"My understanding is a bit different than yours."

No, what you pretend to "understand" is.

"Fact 1 – this is correct:

GHGs cause the planet to warm by reducing the rate at which it cools. "

Moreover, the method by which it happens is:

GHGs warm the planet.

Direct radiation from those gasses, to the earth, warming it.

But the ground doesn’t get any warmer from the re-emitted infrared radiation – it continues to cool, but at a slower rate.

Do you hear what you're saying?!

According to you remitted downward radiation isn't absorbed. If this was actually the case then it would have to be 100% reflected back to space, in which case there'd be no 'greenhouse' effect at all...

Effectively what you are saying is that downward radiation from the sun can warm the planet, but downward radiation from radiatively-active gases cannot warm the planet.

My understanding is a bit different than yours.

Your understanding is nothing more than logically fallacious motivated reasoning.

I am not a climate scientist.

It shows.

Your understanding is nothing more than logically fallacious motivated reasoning.

Admirable restraint there, Bernard J.

* * *

RickA continues with his argument from ignorance:

There is no requirement that I am aware of for the GHG molecule to strike another molecule and give up its extra energy kinetically.

Wrong yesterday; still wrong today:

Certain gases in the atmosphere have the property of absorbing infrared radiation. Oxygen and nitrogen the major gases in the atmosphere do not have this property. The infrared radiation strikes a molecule such as carbon dioxide and causes the bonds to bend and vibrate - this is called the absorption of IR energy. The molecule gains kinetic energy by this absorption of IR radiation. This extra kinetic energy may then be transmitted to other molecules such as oxygen and nitrogen and causes a general heating of the atmosphere.

When are you going to admit you got this wrong:

GHGs don’t actually warm, and any climate scientist will admit that.

Because it is wrong.

Next up:

At night, when the sun has gone down

The diurnal cycle is averaged out when discussing general energy balance. Coz you know, the world, it spins all of the time. So all the verbiage above is just... wrongness.

Since the solar flux is roughly constant but the increase in GHGs inhibits longwave radiation back out to space, a radiative imbalance develops at the top of the atmosphere. More energy enters than leaves. Energy therefore begins to accumulate in the climate system (mainly the oceans), which in turn heat the atmosphere until it is warm enough for radiative equilibrium to be re-established at TOA. So:

GHGs cause the planet to warm by reducing the rate at which it cools.

When are you going to admit that you were wrong to call this 'nonsensical'?

But if you want to think I am a dishonest little shit – that is ok with me.

Unless and until you admit your obvious and now repeatedly-demonstrated errors you are being a dishonest little shit.

And of course Bernard J has nailed another layer of wrong in your silly claim that GHGs 'do not warm':

Effectively what you are saying is that downward radiation from the sun can warm the planet, but downward radiation from radiatively-active gases cannot warm the planet.

So you will need to acknowledge that aspect of your error too.

The longer you persist in dishonestly refusing to admit your errors the worse it will get.

* * *

I have not forgotten your dishonest refusal to admit error about the definition of climate sensitivity and subsequent lying about it. It all just mounts up.

Dick's only gotten as far as the G&T paper. Someone at WTFUWT must have passed the link to E&E for him to read to be "sciencey" with the grown ups.

We know from his "problems" with explaining how he measures tyre pressure without a full square inch to measure that he has problems understanding maths if it turns up.Is it any wonder he doesn't know how radiation works?

Bernard and BBD:

Actually what I said was "The surface is still emitting more than is being sent back towards the surface, so it is still cooling – but cooling more slowly."

The photon emitted from the ground which is absorbed by the GHG molecule is re-emitted - but it can be re-emitted in any direction, only some of which are back down to the ground.

So NET, less heads towards the ground than is emitted in the first place, so NET less is absorbed by the ground than emitted in the first place, so the ground continues to cool.

So NET, less heads towards the ground than is emitted in the first place, so NET less is absorbed by the ground than emitted in the first place, so the ground continues to cool.

Except that it doesn't. The majority of 'the ground' is of course ocean, and ocean heat content is RISING as the sustained energy balance at TOA causes energy to accumulate in the climate system (predominantly ocean).

If you were correct, OHC would be falling. You are wrong, QED.

So how much more of this shite are we going to have to go through before you stop wriggling and admit it?

The surface is still emitting more than is being sent back towards the surface, so it is still cooling – but cooling more slowly.

Think about this.

If solar flux is approximately constant but the rate of energy loss from the surface is reduced (as you agree that it is), then on average, over time does the surface:

1/ Stay at the same temperature

2/ Cool

3/ Warm

If the ground is always cooling, then how long would it take for the ground to reach absolute zero given the same amount of Co2 and solar radiation that the earth has now?
Constant cooling would suggest as much right?

"In four years, I can’t recall a single discussion with a 'skeptic' that I would regard as having been worthwhile and constructive."

- aTTP

#TakeOutTheTrash

Corey

Me neither, and I've been doing it longer than ATTP.

However, bad information *never* gets a free pass. That's how fake news begins to thrive and displace the truth. That's how the liars and the money get a foot in the door. If bad information cannot be shut out of the public discourse then it must be challenged and shown up for what it is.

Agreed, BBD - and I am grateful for the MANY bloggers and commentators who regularly untangle the denier/lukewarmer/willfully ignorant nonsense posted ad nauseum by RickA and his ilk.

I understand that the presence of such an imbecile on this forum implies the possibility of hundreds of comments in any given thread, but the entertainment factor died years ago.

I urge our host to turn the silly fuck away.

Make that, "ad nauseam"...

(Damned Latinos, amiright RickA?)

RickA is not an imbecile, nor is he being silly.

He is trying to be clever (and failing) to discredit climate science, intentionally, and for specific self-serving purposes.

He has financial investments (and possibly career investments) in the fossil fuel industry, and he wants to protect those investments and try to increase their value as much as possible.

Renewable energy and "keeping the carbon in the ground" costs RickA money. He's fighting against that.

It is no matter to RickA if doing this causes pain, suffering, financial loss, and/or loss of life to others as a consequence. What matters to RickA is RickA.

He's a libertarian, don't forget: "I got mine, boo-hoo for you." It's a different morality. Or, abject lack thereof.

"RickA is not an imbecile, nor is he being silly."

Just a fuck, then? Fair enough.

"Actually what I said was “The surface is still emitting more than is being sent back towards the surface, so it is still cooling – but cooling more slowly.”"

So the surface is getting warmed by the GHG emissions reaching it.

Is this going to be like your incapacity to realise how "per unit" works?

I would say, "cravenly self-centered".

In the vernacular, that might be rendered in any one of the many colorful forms as used on this blog.

But please don't ascribe it to RickA being stupid or vexatious, or kid yourselves into thinking you can "correct" his thinking. He already knows what you're trying to communicate.

He just doesn't want to agree, not does he want anyone else to agree - especially if they're unsure about the science and the facts.

Get between RickA and his beloved money (lifestyle) and you'll have a never-ending fight on your hands.

But not because he's stupid. Unless, of, course, you look at the bigger picture that he's also ignoring: that his short-term self-serving goals, if realized, is a Machiavellian deal with the Devil that will ultimately upend himself and cause him to lose it all and more...

Okay, he IS stupid.

So is this post incorrect?

https://scied.ucar.edu/carbon-dioxide-absorbs-and-re-emits-infrared-rad…

No, it's correct.

It even is why you're wrong, dick.

RickA - did I mention something above about people that choose to mislead or deceive? If not, I should have. Oh yes, it's up there in #58.

Obviously you have chosen not to understand the question *intentionally* to use semantics to try and prove a point to rescue a position that is completely incorrect *and* at the same time go off on a red-herring.

I think this is typical of deniers. many people think it's typical of deniers and fake skeptics. You are true to your pseudoskeptic credentials.

Do we actually need to restate the question formally to avoid your *semantic* quibbling before you'll agree that " any question as at least two points of view" is simply incorrect?

Here we are nearly 100 comments into the thread and all you've provided is incorrect thoughts and FUD. Is that your goal in life?

From your link: "emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from human activities (mostly burning fossil fuels) have begun to warm Earth's climate"

Now, what were you saying? Aaaack. Who cares. I've had more interesting conversations with 'bots.

RickA

Dodging the question that shows you are wrong. Failing to admit error. Dishonest.

The surface is still emitting more than is being sent back towards the surface, so it is still cooling – but cooling more slowly.

Think about this.

If solar flux is approximately constant but the rate of energy loss from the surface is reduced (as you agree that it is), then on average, over time does the surface:

1/ Stay at the same temperature

2/ Cool

3/ Warm

So is this post incorrect?

It is incomplete.

You've had a correct (more complete) explanation of the mechanism by which CO2 thermalises the atmosphere already.

BBD:

I have been doing more reading, trying to understand your point.

Let me check my understanding.

1. If a photon is absorbed by CO2, it increases the energy of the molecule.

2. If a photon is emitted by the CO2 molecule it decreases the energy of the molecule.

3. If the molecule doesn't hit anything before the absorbed photon is re-emitted than there is no temperature heating effect to the atmosphere.

4. If the molecule does hit something before the absorbed photon is re-emitted it raises the temperature of the atmosphere over that of the molecule without the absorbed photon because of its higher energy state (it has more kinetic energy).

5. So the warming of the atmosphere is caused by the extra CO2 molecules (compared to yesterday, for example) kinetically hitting other molecules while they have an absorbed photon.

If this is correct than I agree I was wrong.

I was looking only at the ground and seeing a net decrease of energy (more photons emitted than re-emitted back towards the ground).

I wasn't considering the atmosphere or the atmosphere + ground.

I still think it is possible for a CO2 molecule to absorb and re-emit a photon before it hits another molecule - but obviously some fraction will hit, so I can see how the temperature of the atmosphere could be considered warmer.

Because everyday there will be more CO2 molecules in the atmosphere to capture the photons emitted by the ground.

I admit I was wrong.

I withdraw my statement that your statement was nonsensical.

It makes sense to me now, looking at it over time and considering both the ground and atmosphere.

Even with my admission - I am not ready to admit to Kevin that some issues only have a single point of view.

Even if we are both saying the equivalent thing (GHGs warm vs. GHGs slow the rate of cooling) - I submit that these two statement present different points of view.

Much like Einsteins example of the person tossing the ball up on a moving train. The person on the train sees the ball go straight up and back down, while the person in the other frame of reference sees the ball describe a parabola. Same ball, two different points of view.

5. So the warming of the atmosphere is caused by the extra CO2 molecules (compared to yesterday, for example) kinetically hitting other molecules while they have an absorbed photon.

If this is correct than I agree I was wrong.

Thank you.

I still think it is possible for a CO2 molecule to absorb and re-emit a photon before it hits another molecule – but obviously some fraction will hit, so I can see how the temperature of the atmosphere could be considered warmer.

Don't spoil it... By far the majority of CO2 molecules thermalise the surrounding atmosphere by collision. This is because the photon re-emission rate is much slower than molecular collision rates at tropospheric pressure. So *most* energy transfer from IR photon to GHG molecular vibration to atmospheric thermalisation occurs through kinetic transfer (collision) between the GHG molecule and adjacent molecules of atmospheric gasses.

Because everyday there will be more CO2 molecules in the atmosphere to capture the photons emitted by the ground.

I admit I was wrong.

I withdraw my statement that your statement was nonsensical.

Thank you.

Even if we are both saying the equivalent thing (GHGs warm vs. GHGs slow the rate of cooling) – I submit that these two statement present different points of view.

No, the original statement I made was correct and expresses a single point of view:

GHGs cause the planet to warm by reducing the rate at which it cools.

RickA - I have already said that many questions afford multiple viewpoints.

But some questions do not.

You said that *any* question has at least two points of view. That is nonsensical. In what city were you born? Are you currently married? Is the earth a dish carried on the backs of giant tortoises?

Now, you may play the semantic game - a standard tactic of anyone that finds themselves backed into a logical corner - or simply admit that some questions do not legitimately afford two different viewpoints.

So far you've just doubled down on ignorance and deception.

P.S. The Einstein example does not support your belief. Hint, ask the question, then formulate the answer(s). Is there one or more correct answer(s)? Can the question be reformulated to give one correct answer? Einstein's whole gist here is how to arrive at the one correct answer - not your belief that there are many correct answers.

Question: Given a moving train and two observers, one on the train and one stationary, if a ball on the train is tossed straight up will the two observers describe the movement of the ball the same way?

One correct answer: No. Why? See Einstein. Other views? See RickA.

Kevin #97:

I wasn't talking about questions or facts - but issues.

If you reread the language you quoted from my post you will see "issues".

But if you think there is no issue with more than one point of view - well that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

It is my opinion that every issue has more than one point of view.

Otherwise it wouldn't be an issue.

RickA -"I wasn’t talking about questions or facts – but issues."

Then your Einstein example was irrelevant. Why did you bring it up? I just showed that your example was not a valid example, so now, in your view, it's irrelevant.!

My Einstein example was to show that how you phrase the question is important. Whether it be facts or issues the correct answer is often a matter of asking the correct question. My emphasis here is that you *intentionally* seek to mislead by NOT seeking to ask the correct question or use semantics to ask a answer a different question.

The dictionary says an issue is "an important topic or problem for debate or discussion." Relativity is not an important topic for discussion? Odd then why physics teachers spend so much time making sure students understand it properly.

Tell us then, is whether or not an increase in GHGs effectively warm a planet an issue, a fact, or a question?

P.S. Facts and questions can also be issues - they are not mutually exclusive. See "alternative facts" for discussion.

A) CO2 effectively warms the planet.
B) Does CO2 effectively warm the planet?

A) is a statement of fact. B) takes the same statement of fact and poses it as a question. All statements of fact can be posed as questions.

Issues are those facts or questions that we deem important. All issues are either statements of facts or questions. Yet RickA tells us, "“I wasn’t talking about questions or facts – but issues.”

This is clearly muddled thinking. Grok that :)

A charitable reader could try to make sense of this. While RickA has lost the default privilege of being read charitably, I will make the attempt.

As I see it the only way to make sense of RickA's remark is to redefine 'issue' to mean any statement or question for which the truth or answer is subjective or not known.

This still is problematic. There exist many questions/issues where the answer is not known, but is bounded; i.e., we know some POV are incorrect even though the correct answer isn't known. Still, within the limits of these bounds there can exist differing legitimate POV.

The more consistent interpretation of RickA's statement would thus limit 'issue' to only referring to subjective questions. I don't think this is actually what he meant when he used 'issue' in his statement, but it is the most charitable reading. Of course the fact that he went on to dispute CO2's warming efficacy blatantly begs against this charitable interpretation.

There is also RickA's long history of debate style to account for (i.e., all those past discussions where he has attempted to distort, mislead, and deceive). In the end we are left with he meant 'issue' as subjective questions or he was simply incorrect. The latter is the more parsimonious answer.

Kevin #101:

Lets review.

I wrote post 29.

You wrote post 32, quoting my post 29.

I then wrote post 33.

You introduced a strawman in #35 and switch my "issues" to your "questions" - and said I was a poor reader and called me a moron. This is where you introduced your example of "GHGs warm the planet".

Now in #101 you wax poetic on A and B - but add the word "effectively".

I would suggest that perhaps you are the poor reader.

I would point out that you started calling names and offered an example which I merely answered, and which diverted the entire thread, as we followed your example down the rabbit hole.

Perhaps you could go back and re-read 29, 32 and 33 and perhaps try to be a bit more charitable in the first instance.

RickA - Your #102 adds nothing. It's a red-herring. You have no legitimate answers to the argument so you digress.

"There are at least two points of view for any issue."
“I wasn’t talking about questions or facts – but issues.”

Any fact, or question can be an issue. An issue is nothing more than a topic we deem important for debate or discussion.

You add nonsense to nonsense.

Your Einstein example was turned on its head and now it's irrelevant. You play a game, rather than seek illumination, but you don't play the game very well.

"I wasn’t talking about questions or facts – but issues."

But issues don't have two answers. I have an itchy foot. That doesn't have two answers. It's itchy.

Moreover, your claim DOES NOT MAKE SENSE as an "issue".

So you're back to talking bollocks. No wonder you didn't get a law job, you'd be shit at it.

"Tell us then, is whether or not an increase in GHGs effectively warm a planet an issue, a fact, or a question? "

In avoiding the answer, Dick here complains that Keith "started calling names and offered an example which I merely answered..."

And note that his "merely answered" showed that he did not understand what HE HIMSELF was talking about, since the issue (see what I did?) was clarified with the question made.

And his answer neither cleared anything up nor revealed that he had found the issue at hand.

Was it a misuse of executive power for Obama to announce he would not deport illegal immigrants that met criteria determined by Obama? How about to give them work authorization(EAD cards)?

Did you complain when Obama unilaterally declared the Senate was not in session and did a recess appointment? Obama had the worst record in court of any president since at least FDR. Even the Democratic appointees were ruling against him, like when he tried to declare that the government could interfere with who churches hired as ministers.

Regarding Committee rules, if one side decides they are not going to appear at committees at all just to wreck the process, then this sort of thing will happen. Under THE RULES, there could be no work done, simply because some Senators object. They could suggest the absence of a quorum at all times and then bog it down with repeated roll calls. Yet these sort of things don't happen because there is an informal rule that the government must operate. You might say, well then they will be thrown out of office. However, the Senate is a continuing body, and the Republicans could then under THE RULES refuse to accept a change of rules on the first day of the new Senate, refusing to accept that they have lost the seats and the new committee assignments, etc. Indeed, Congress decides on the seating of its own members, so they could even rig THE RULES to deny seats to the new members.

Did you complain when Harry Reid ignored the rules and said you could not filibuster a Cabinet nominee or judge nomination?
Standing rules of the Senate said you could not implement a rules change like this with less than a two-thirds vote, and yet Reid did it on majority vote. It's a little late to complain when Republicans do the same thing(though according to Orrin Hatch what they did was within the rules.)

Any argument that claims (false) equivalence between Obama and Trump is so dishonest as to be instantly self-defeating. It only underscores just how vast the chasm between the two is.

Those who endorse Trump now will of course be held responsible for the consequences of his actions. And since there are no brakes on this train, the future will not be bright either for Trump or his claque.

Goodness Dick has put his other socks on.

Fascism, Mikey. This is what you defend, and it's one of many reasons why we're better than you.

Regarding today's update, let's call a spade a spade. The USA has in a matter of months been turned from a wobbly democracy into a fully-fledged dictatorship. And yes, people, it is a dictatorship - one man is dictating what will be, and who will be doing it, without consulting thhe traditional avenues of advice. And certainly without reflecting the will of the majority, or the international standards of human rights.

And given the strength of the right-wing media's hold on the proles, and the disenfranchisement of persecuted minorities from the voting process, I suspect that even with the maintenance of an 'election' process (if such survives...) there's no way that the Alt-Right will be letting go of their God-gven right to rule. It seems that too many USAdians forgot the history of 1930s Europe...

Or didn't care... I can't help but think of the post-WWII protests of ignorance by so many Germans of the time*, and wonder whether Trump supporters will eventually resort to a similar bleating:

https://theconversation.com/wwii-trial-poses-uncomfortable-questions-of…

https://www.quora.com/Nazi-Germany-To-what-extent-were-average-German-c…

This is not a bad dream, but it is a nightmare.

[*One cannot hold today's generations culpable - Germany at least has certainly learned from history.]

[*One cannot hold today’s generations culpable – Germany at least has certainly learned from history.]

And some of that is because they don't accept "Free Speech Uber Alles" when it comes to Nazi propaganda.

Meanwhile the USA in its attempt to feel yet more special (needs), use their constitutional right as if it somehow isn't copied from European ideals and in the EU charter too. Merely because they refuse to "censor" ideas (except those they decide are criminal, natch) because it would dent their proof of specialness.

What Germany has done with their law has ensured that, though they can teach their children about Nazi Germany, they can't be programmed by its propaganda, and so the acts that they let themselves be complicit in before can not happen again.

The law is an admission that they failed once. To quote the post-Great War line: Never Again.

This time they mean it.

I wonder what excuses RickA will offer for this fiasco, Trump and Bannon already have blood on their hands, and its only just begun.

US military officials say Trump approved counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence or ground support

Mitch McConnell predicted exactly this over many years, but no one would listen. He gave speech after speech about the breakdown of Senate tradition and collegiality and no consideration being given to the minority or the proper operation of Congress. He said that Democrats would not be in charge forever, and changes made will haunt them.

shorter MikeN: McConnell complained for years that the president wasn't white.

Shortest MikeN: Republicans will show you how to really wreck the system.. now that we can get away with it.

You can't pretend it's all the Democrats' fault MikeN. Nobody believes you now, and when the shit truly comes down, they won't believe you then either. You've dug your grave already.

I didn't say it's all the Democrats' fault. I'm asking if this same standard of 'if you don't follow the rules, you will get the Holocaust' was applied by Greg Laden when Democrats were doing similar things.

Yeah, right. And you're SUCH a reliable recounter of the past, "Mike".

Ever measured your car's tyre pressure?

Mikey:

Genocide is strictly a Conservative ideal in contemporary American politics.

(Okay, not ENTIRELY true:

"And they all seemed to really hate my grandpa, 'cause they keep yelling 'kill whitey' and I'm like 'what do you think you are, alcohol?'"

- Kenneth Parcell, "30 Rock"

)

:-)

when Democrats were doing similar things.

Except that the Democrats have never done anything remotely like what Trump and his troupe have done in the last week. First, as pointed out, you are making shit up, which underlines how different Trump and Obama actually are. This makes you look silly and dishonest. Second, you are *still* engaging in tu quoque which automatically invalidates your 'argument'.

You need better bullshit to defend the indefensible.

Rules of the Senate do not allow changing the rules on majority vote, yet Democrats did that to get Cabinet members and judges approved when Republicans were filibustering. How is that not remotely like what Trump and his troupe have done in the last week?

" How is that not remotely like what Trump and his troupe have done in the last week?"

Because

"Democrats did that to get Cabinet members and judges approved when Republicans were filibustering"

Trump's picks haven't even been properly vetted.

>Second, you are *still* engaging in tu quoque which automatically invalidates your ‘argument’.

No it doesn't invalidate my argument because it is my argument. I agree the rules should be followed. I just wish he had been as adamant about it when the Democrats weren't following the rules. Well maybe not 'Dems are like Nazis' adamant, but angry.

Guys, it's all ok. The USA has lots of Responsible Gun Owners(TM) who will soon act to protect the Constitution against any executive trying to rip it up and use as toilet paper.

They've been quite vocal on this point for the last few decades. I'm sure they'll put things to rights soon enough.

(Some cynics may think that they only care about vaguely left wing politicians getting uppity and would let far right republican s get away with anything. Perish the thought.)

(Even more cynical people might suggest that they wouldn't have the faintest idea of what to do in any case. Again, perish the thought even more)

MikeN

No it doesn’t invalidate my argument because it is my argument.

No, you are pulling a tu quoque.

You say:

I agree the rules should be followed.

But instead of criticising the Trump Troupe for behaving like escaped ferrets you are bashing the Democrats.

Switcheroo.

Andrew Dodds- :) :) :)

I'm not bashing the Democrats, I am bashing Greg Laden. I will note that had the Democrats not done what they did then, then the Republicans would not be doing what they are doing now, because there would have been no need for Democrats to boycott the committee hearings. They could have filibustered the nominees on the Senate floor. The mere existence of the filibuster would have likely prevented several of the nominations from even being made.

No mikeN, you are asserting things that never happened in order to defend President Trump. Your dishonesty about history is clear, and the reason for your distortions about President Obama's years are equally clear

I'll say one thing for the ignoramus, their antics are making this blog a bit of a pointless read.

When their posts could even tangentially tied to reality, there was something to work with, but now with the alternative facts and the post truth and post normal BS they're doing, there's nothing there to argue with, since there's no common frame of reference.

They may as well be speaking a different language and come from a different planet.

Not buying it, MikeN.

First:

yet Democrats did that to get Cabinet members and judges approved when Republicans were filibustering.

Then:

I will note that had the Democrats not done what they did then, then the Republicans would not be doing what they are doing now,

MikeN must be arguing that the Democrats must be allowed the opportunity to filibuster the nominees' confirmation sessions.

I'll second that.

While Trump and his minions (or maybe he is a minion himself, because who knows who's really in charge?) are distracting the two parties and their partisan bases with Hatfields and McCoys red meat fodder, they are deploying a plan to extract as much money and power for themselves, and in turn, they are allowing the amassing of political power for the extremist religious right in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government with the goals of striking down the separation of religion and government, and rolling back hard won social freedoms along with the laws that protect the environment and protections of all sorts from predatory financial practices to workers and citizens rights, in an attempt to turn our country into a theocracy/autocracy.
The religious zealots will run roughshod over our laws while the rich will keep them safe and warm, allowing them power as long as they (the wealthy) can dominate pillage and control the economy to their advantage, in a sick kind of symbiotic.relationship.
Do not pay attention to the sideshow folks! The real action is being done during the distractions (just as in a magic show) while everyone is caught up in the latest outrage.
These people are crazy like a fox, and we (both side of the political spectrum) are being played, and we had better wake the hell up before it is too late!

The religious zealots will run roughshod over our laws while the rich will keep them safe and warm, allowing them power as long as they...

Indeed skepticmac57, two markers for this are:

1) Trump Vows to ‘Destroy’ Law Banning Political Endorsements by Churches

2) Betsy DeVos, Pick for Secretary of Education, Is the Most Jeered

DeVos is sure to attempt to further undermine the teaching of science and especially evolution. A brother is Erik Prince of Blackwater notoriety and money laundering charges — fine Christian principles at work there.

I wish to congratualate you Greg on
an articulate piece of writing.
And from a personal perspective, I thank you
for it.
My one quibble is the final sentence.
The assumation seems to be that the only
checks are of a communally agreed nature.
Policy, law and so forth.
I would like to think valid checks are also personal
in nature.
Not because we feel policy and law imposed
upon us, but because of who we individually are.
Our beliefs and attitudes.
So just as its important to monitor the
macro checks, its important to look
occasionally at ones own attitudes and beliefs.

Again Greg, I thank you.

And so the dismantling of public health begins: Donald Trump meets with antivaccine ideologue Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to discuss "vaccine safety" and autism

oracknows — Tue, 10 Jan 2017 23:05:29 +0000

And so the dismantling of public health begins: Donald Trump meets with antivaccine ideologue Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to discuss "vaccine safety" and autism

I remember when I first heard on Twitter yesterday afternoon that our President-Elect, Donald Trump, was going to meet with longtime antivaccine crank Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Remembering how Trump had met with antivaccine "hero" Andrew Wakefield before the election and how after the election antivaccine activists were practically salivating over the thought of what Trump might do with respect to the CDC and vaccines, I was reminded of just how much I fear for medical science policy under the Trump administration. I got a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach. For a moment, I actually thought that Trump might be appointing RFK, Jr. to run the CDC. It was the measure of just how bizarre Trump's appointments have been that I even thought such a thing possible. I also marveled at the coincidence. After all, I had just written two posts about The Cleveland Clinic's embrace of quackery and an antivaccine rant by one of its leading doctors, and here was a story that tied into that. Remember, Dr. Mark Hyman co-authored an antivaccine book of the thimerosal fear mongering variety with RFK, Jr. right around the time he was being recruited to The Cleveland Clinic to set up a new Center for Functional Medicine.

Coincidence aside, fortunately, I was wrong. Trump did not offer the position of CDC director to RFK, Jr. (It had to be because RFK, Jr. is such a dedicated environmentalist and the CDC does a lot of studies regarding environmental determinants of health.) Unfortunately, news reports soon flowed about what had really happened, specifically how Trump had tapped RFK, Jr. to chair some sort of Presidential committee on vaccination:

After meeting with President-elect Donald Trump at Trump Tower Tuesday, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. told reporters that Trump has asked him to "chair a commission on vaccination safety and scientific integrity" and that he has accepted.
Both Trump and Kennedy have spread fringe theories linking vaccines to autism in children, an idea that medical experts overwhelmingly reject and have warned is endangering public health by discouraging parents from immunizing their kids.

Also:

I do like how NBC described RFK, Jr. as favoring "fringe theories" over established science, which is true, although the pedant in me can't resist pointing out that "theory" is the wrong word to use to describe antivaccine beliefs. One of the things that really irritated me about seeing the flood of stories over the afternoon as I sat in my office taking advantage of a canceled case to work on a paper was how often RFK, Jr. was described as a "vaccine skeptic." (I'm talking to you, Business Insider, but not just to you.) He is not. He is an antivaccine crank, a vaccine science denialist of the highest—or should I say lowest?—order. He is no different at his core than anthropogenic global climate change denialists, creationists (a.k.a., evolution denialists), or any number of ideology-driven science-denying cranks, and I'll do a brief trip down memory lane at the end of this post to give you an idea of just how bad RFK, Jr. is with respect to vaccines.

Be that as it may, the social media reaction was immediate and brutal, as you might imagine. However, as you can see from the report above and the NBC News report, aired late afternoon, the Trump team issued a "clarification" saying that Trump was "exploring the possibility of forming a committee on Autism" but that "no decision has been made at this time." Of course, if you're going to form a "committee on autism," why would you even be talking to someone like RFK, Jr. if you weren't planning on making the committee's mission about antivaccine pseudoscience claiming that vaccines cause autism? After all, RFK, Jr. has zero, nada, zilch in the way of relevant scientific or clinical expertise in autism to run such a panel. He's known primarily as an environmentalist and an antivaccine crank who was largely responsible for popularizing the failed hypothesis turned crank idea that mercury in vaccines causes autism nearly 12 years ago. (We'll get to how antivaccine he is in a moment, along with his long history of antivaccine activism.) In other words, he has zero qualifications to chair a panel on autism that would be in any way valid or scientific.

You can tell exactly what RFK, Jr. plans from his answers in a Q&A with Science:

Did the President-elect request the meeting or did you?

He called me a week ago to request it.

Why?

He wants to make sure that we have the best vaccine science and the safest vaccine supply that we can have.

Did the President-elect indicate that he doesn’t believe that to be the case at the moment?

He is troubled by questions of the links between certain vaccines and the epidemic of neurodevelopmental disorders including autism. And he has a number – he told me five – friends, he talked about each one of them, who has the same story of a child, a perfectly healthy child who went into a wellness visit around age 2, got a battery of vaccines, spiked a fever and then developed a suite of deficits in the 3 months following the vaccine.

He said that he understood that anecdote was not science, but said that if there’s enough anecdotal evidence… that we’d be arrogant to dismiss it. Those were his words.

I, for one, do not for a moment believe that Donald Trump understands that anecdotes are not science, that correlation does not necessarily (and frequently doesn't) equal causation in medicine. After all, Trump has a long and sordid history of spewing antivaccine misinformation dating back at least nine years, when I first noted him believing the claims of the vaccine-autism movement with respect to blaming autistic regression on vaccines. Later, he claimed a "monster shot" causes autism. Over the years, he would take to Twitter and post things like:

Healthy young child goes to doctor, gets pumped with massive shot of many vaccines, doesn't feel good and changes - AUTISM. Many such cases!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 28, 2014

Or:

I am being proven right about massive vaccinations—the doctors lied. Save our children & their future.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2014

Or the dumbest one of all:

No more massive injections. Tiny children are not horses—one vaccine at a time, over time.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2014

I mean, seriously. How much fluid does Donald Trump think is in vaccines? If RFK, Jr. is to be believed, he also subscribes to various antivaccine tropes, such as the "toxins" gambit or "too many too soon."

You can see from the interview that RFK, Jr. is chomping at the bit to go after the CDC:

Did the President-elect mention the CDC?

We talked a lot about CDC and ways to increase the independence from financial conflicts at CDC in the vaccine division.

You said that the commission is to delve into “vaccine safety and scientific integrity.” What is that second piece about?

To make sure that we’re getting good science out of CDC.

It’s all about CDC? It’s not about “scientific integrity” in chemistry or physics or basic biology or anywhere else?

Exactly. [CDC] is the locus of most of the most serious problems with the vaccine program, the two divisions at CDC: the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the Immunization Safety Office which is where the scientists are.

There you have it. Assuming RFK, Jr. isn't lying or exaggerating (always a possibility), Donald Trump buys into a world view that matches up nearly perfectly with his and that of many antivaccine cranks. He thinks the CDC is corrupt, which it is not. He somehow thinks the ACIP is hobbled with conflicts of interest. This merely shows his ignorance. As I explained before, the ACIP has very rigorous rules to prevent conflicts of interest. We know that Andrew Wakefield gave Trump a copy of VAXXED, an antivaccine propaganda film so over-the-top that it would make Leni Reifenstahl blush. We don't know if Trump ever watched it, but it wouldn't surprise me if he did and that he believed all the lies in it, particularly the "CDC whistleblower" manufactroversy. This sounds just like the sort of nonsense we've been hearing from the antivaccine movement for years. Clearly, RFK, Jr. believes in the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement, namely that the "truth is out there" but the CDC is covering it up.

Not surprisingly, when asked whom he wanted on the committee, RFK, Jr. got a bit more—shall we say?—vague:

How many people will be on the commission?

A dozen people -- a mix between science people and prominent Americans.

Who will you ask to serve?

I couldn’t tell you. I just finished meeting with the President-elect an hour ago.

When you say “science people,” do you mean experts from the scientific establishment?

Prominent scientists.

Do you mean prominent vaccinologists who believe in the safety and efficacy of today’s vaccines?

We are going to look for people who have expertise in toxicology, epidemiology and in public health.

Notice how RFK, Jr. ducked and weaved over the question of what sort of "science people" he would appoint. The meaning is clear. If this committee ever comes to be, RFK, Jr. will appoint antivaccine crank scientists like Andrew Wakefield, Brian Hooker, Mark Geier, Christopher Shaw, and the like.

The most hilarious part of the interview was the end. First:

Do you have scientific training?

No. My background is I’m an environmental lawyer. I’m not a scientist. But I have an expertise, I would say in reading science and spotting junk science because that’s what I do with most of my time.

I laughed out loud here. I really did. This is Dunning-Kruger, the arrogance of ignorance incarnate. RFK, Jr. doesn't have any relevant training in the sciences of immunology or vaccines, the clinical management and science of autism, or any other relevant science; yet he's supremely confident that he can "spot junk science." No, he can't. He falls for junk science time and time and time again and has been falling for it ever since I first encountered him nearly 12 years ago. He cites the research of Mark and David Geier! Seriously, if you can't recognize their research for the total crap that it is, your claim to be able to recognize junk science is risible in the extreme! RFK, Jr. has also cited Boyd Haley, a disgraced chemist who came to believe that mercury in vaccines causes autism and who believes that mercury dental amalgams are the root of nearly all disease. The guy Chair of the Advisory Committee for Toxic Teeth, for cryin' out loud. Kennedy likes Brian Hooker's work, and Brian Hooker is the most incompetent epidemiologist and statistician I have ever encountered, mainly because he's a biochemical engineer who fancies himself an epidemiologist. This is a guy who actually said that in statistics simplicity is elegance.

No, it's not, and, no, RFK, Jr. wouldn't recognize junk science if it bit him on the proverbial posterior.

Of course, RFK, Jr. can't resist finishing with the old "I'm not antivaccine, I'm pro-vaccine safety" gambit:

I am for vaccines. I have been tracking mercury in fish for 30 years and nobody has called me anti-fish. I am pro-vaccine. I had all my kids vaccinated. I think vaccines save lives. But we are also seeing an explosion in neurodevelopmental disorders and we ought to be able to do a cost benefit analysis and see what’s causing them. We ought to have robust, transparent science and an independent regulatory agency. Nobody is trying to get rid of vaccines here. I just want safe vaccines.

At least, RFK, Jr. is not referring to himself as "fiercely pro-vaccine" any more. That was just pathetic, as though he were trying too hard or, as I like to put it, the lady doth protest too much. Let's just put it this way, RFK, Jr. is so "fiercely pro-vaccine" that he routinely says things like:

They get the shot, that night they have a fever of a hundred and three, they go to sleep, and three months later their brain is gone. This is a holocaust, what this is doing to our country.

True, he did apologize, but his "apology" sounded as sincere as Dr. Neides' apology for his antivaccine screed did over the weekend. Let's recall RFK, Jr.'s "apology" for using the word "Holocaust":

I want to apologize to all whom I offended by my use of the word to describe the autism epidemic. I employed the term during an impromptu speech as I struggled to find an expression to convey the catastrophic tragedy of autism which has now destroyed the lives of over 20 million children and shattered their families.

He was just sorry that he got a little...carried away by the horrors of autism. Even if what Trump has in mind is a committee on autism and not so much on vaccines, if you had a family member with autism, be it mild or severe, would you want someone who thinks autism is so horrible that it's akin to a "Holocaust" or who thinks that autistic children's brains are gone? He'd also have been more convincing if that had been the first time he'd used Holocaust analogies to describe autism. The antivaccine crank blog quoted him doing the same thing in 2013, although they took down the post and it is now only available in snippets quoted on other blogs during the brief time the AoA post was live, for example right here on this very blog:

Each of us will have our highlights from last weekend’s extraordinary Autism One gathering in Chicago, but for me it was Bobby Kennedy Jr. saying, “To my mind this is like the Nazi death camps.”

“This” is the imprisonment of so many of our children in the grip of autism. Talk about cutting through the neurodiverse claptrap! When Bobby Kennedy says something, it gives “cover,” in a sense, for others to use the same kind of language and frame the debate in the same kind of way. (Language that reminds me of David Kirby’s phrase, “the shuttered hell” of autism, in Evidence of Harm.)

Those who can advocate for themselves should do so. Move right along, please. Those who cannot have advocates like their parents and RFK Jr. who are sick of mincing words.

Again, RFK, Jr. isn't "antivaccine." Oh, no. Perish the thought. He just likes to use an offensively over-the-top metaphor in which vaccines have produced a "Holocaust" of autism or a metaphor in which "vaccine-induced" autism imprisons children in a state that he likens to Nazi death camps How on earth could you think that's antivaccine? How dare you? Of course, RFK, Jr. knows what he's doing. Notice how in the 2013 incident he made his death camp analogy while speaking to the faithful at Autism One. When unexpectedly one of the AoA bloggers wrote about his remarks, they mysteriously disappeared from the blog within a day or so. One wonders if RFK, Jr. had a little chat with Dan Olmsted, who did the write-up, one does.

Let's take a trip down memory lane to close out this post. I first encountered RFK, Jr.'s antivaccine stylings in 2005 when he published Deadly Immunity, which was jointly published in both Salon.com and Rolling Stone. Salon.com ultimately retracted it, but, to its shame, Rolling Stone never did. Back then, this blog was only six months old and had much, much lower traffic than it does now. I wrote an epic and incredibly snarky deconstruction of the misinformation, conspiracy theories, and utter nonsense in RFK, Jr.'s article, and it became the the first post of mine that ever "went viral" (or whatever passed for going viral in 2005). To give you a taste of the snark and to show that I actually hav mellowed over the years, I'll just say that Deadly Immunity was so dishonest and full of misinformation and distortions that at the time I labeled it the "biggest, steamingest, drippiest turd I've ever seen it [Salon.com] publish." I wasn't alone. Skeptico famously labeled it his "completely dishonest thimerosal article" and "lies, damned lies, and quote-mining." Another blogger, Majikthise, concluded that the actual transcript of the Simpsonwood Conference, described in such conspiratorial detail as a conference in which the CDC decided to cover up "smoking gun" data showing that thimerosal in vaccines causes autism didn't come close to vindicating Kennedy's grandiose claims and that "nothing said at Simpsonwood suggests an attempt to whitewash or cover up anything." That didn't stop RFK, Jr. from spewing one conspiracy theory after another about how the CDC and big pharma supposedly "covered up" a link between mercury in vaccines and autism, all the while misrepresenting the science.

Out of curiosity, I searched the blog for more past mentions of RFK, Jr., and, not surprisingly, found many. For instance, there was the time when he basically characterized those who don't buy into vaccine-autism pseudoscience as hating mothers. Then there was the time he misrepresented a letter to the CDC by Smith-Kline-Beecham as being evidence of some dark conspiracy by the CDC to “discourage” the removal of mercury from vaccines when it was nothing of the sort. Then there was the time when he defended Katie Wright for subjecting her son to the quackery of chelation therapy to remove mercury from vaccines from his body.

RFK, Jr.'s more recent activity includes, of course, hectoring legislators about vaccines and journalists who call him antivaccine (while refusing to provide a transcript or video of his infamous "vaccine Nazis" speech at Autism One in 2013) and legislators; his aforementioned book with co-author Mark Hyman, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak: Mercury Toxicity in Vaccines and the Political, Regulatory, and Media Failures That Continue to Threaten Public Health; and, of course, cozying up with the Nation of Islam to have them help him convince African-American parents that the CDC is covering up data showing that vaccines increase the risk of autism in African-American boys by roughly four-fold while appearing at protests with them at the CDC. Oh, and he's appearing in an interview in a recently released chiropractor-produced online documentary series that is clearly antivaccine.

No wonder Donald Trump thought first of RFK, Jr. when he thought about paying back all his antivaccine supporters with a "vaccine safety" committee (or autism committee, or whatever it ends up being, if anything). It's a two-fer. He can have the crankiest of antivaccine cranks running the committee and appear bipartisan, given RFK, Jr.'s liberal politics.

Just don't let them tell you that Trump and RFK, Jr. aren't antivaccine. They are. And I know antivaccine when I see it, and so do real antivaccine ideologues. Even if this committee never comes to be, it is more than bad enough that Donald Trump even met with RFK, Jr. about vaccine safety. Pro-science advocates will have to be extra vigilant.

oracknows Tue, 01/10/2017 - 18:05

Tags

autism

complementary and alternative medicine

Skepticism/Critical Thinking

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

vaccines

complementary and alternative medicine

medicine

Politics

Categories

Environment

Mr. Kennedy's complete and vocal contempt for people with autism ("their brains are gone") makes him even less qualified to run a committee on that than on vaccines.

I'm not quite clear what exactly Mr. Trump was thinking when he talked about any committee or commission, and which form that would take. It actually matters, because the form will determine whether he needs Senate approval or legislation or funding - all of which go through Congress. Even if Mr. Trump is devoted enough to the vaccines-cause-autism myth to push for some form of commission, it's going to be - tricky - to get that through Congress.

Especially if he has other things he wants to spend political capital on.

We will have to see what happens in the next days.

Some news outlets are now reporting that Trump didn't offer such a position to Kennedy, but instead talked about a commission on autism. Kennedy would be equally unsuitable, actually more unsuitable, for such a post. He considers autistic people to be 'damaged'.

However, the fact that Trump would even consider talking to Kennedy about these topics demonstrates how damaging he could be. Not just on science.

Well, I did take the shot, then developed a 103 degree fever, was sentenced to bedrest by my peer medics and our officer.
Was right as rain the next day.
But then, that was a mass inoculation event, with the Yellow Fever vaccine being a member common with similar events later in life.
I also suffer from Raynauld's phenomena, which should give a hint.

But, for him, it's magic! *All* vaccines are evil! Not, some really, really suck and some really so, for some people.*

*Others experienced similar, although lesser symptoms the next day, after I recovered and was able to "sentence" them in a similar fashion and treat them in the same manner (Motrin and bedrest, with plenty of fluids).
Most chose beer as their fluid replacement, creating a different issue the following morning.**

**I happen to have a distilled spirits habituation. I also massively rehydrate while doing so and refrain when duty or illness intervenes.

God help the US. I am so, so glad I don't live there anymore.

There seem to be two ways to approach this. One is to attack Kennedy etal the other is to take their "evidence" "science" and and establish a record that addresses all of their "issues" and at the same time establishes a record for the vaccines that do work. By now it should be apparent that Barron has "issues" of some sort ie Trump being 60+ when he was conceived or as Trump thinks the vaccination did it. Hopefully we have learned from climate change how to approach. Then all we have to do is figure out that the likes of the Twin Towers DO NOT collapse because of fire and airplane damage. Then we would really be making progress. Peace

And he has a number – he told me five – friends, he talked about each one of them, who has the same story of a child, a perfectly healthy child who went into a wellness visit around age 2, got a battery of vaccines, spiked a fever and then developed a suite of deficits in the 3 months following the vaccine

If a child is current on ACIP/CDC schedule, there is no "battery" of vaccines at age 2 yrs. At most, there's a hepatitis A vaccine due, and most kids actually get that at 18 month. RFK Jr (and Trump if RFK Jr is quoting him accurately) make absolutely no sense on this, but then again, no one else on the AV side does anyhow when they recount the timeline of their child's supposed vaccine injury.

If Trump goes after the NVICP to dismantle the Vaccine Court, then we could see vaccine manufacturers sued of out business in the US. Then vaccine-preventable diseases come back. Or, If Trump goes really public proclaiming vaccines cause autism I vaccine rates would still go down and in areas teetering on the brink of VPD outbreaks (TX, AZ, OR, etc) diseases will come back. Maybe Trump/Kennedy try to use the unpublished (and I doubt ever will be) claim by anti-vax pediatrician Paul Thomas MD, FAAP in Oregon that 0 of 1176 patients in his practice not vaccinated (per his book) or vaccinated on Thomas' delayed alternative (and untested as he has published anything peer-reviewed on this)vaccine schedule developed autism (http://integrativepediatricsonline.com/images/Forms/The%20Vaccine-Frien… ). Again--diseases come back.

In the end, the science will win when people--especially children--start dying from VPDs which is what will happen no matter how Trump drives down vaccination rates in the US. That would normally take a few years if vaccination rates everywhere were good, but it may happen more quickly, maybe soon enough to matter for the 2020 election. Whether Trump acts quickly on this (as a business person might) or actually considers the importance of not doing things that might get you voted out after one term as President, only time will tell.

A final aside--Robert DeNiro got all over Trump during the election regarding the video tape of Trump/Billy Bush--to the point of saying he would "like to punch Trump in the face" on video back in October. Then in late November DeNiro starts saying we should give Trump a chance. I think now we know why DeNiro wants to give Trump a chance.

That would normally take a few years if vaccination rates everywhere were good, but it may happen more quickly, maybe soon enough to matter for the 2020 election.

Actually, it might not take all that long. Consider Arkansas, with its current measles outbreak hitting 2400 infected.
Now, here's a thought to try to sleep with tonight, a unvaccinated person visits an endemic area, is exposed to and incubating upon return to that area of Arkansas, with a fine case of polio.
Thankfully, there are immunization campaigns in those areas now, but there are plenty of areas now where herd immunity has been significantly weakened.

I just hope the next outbreak is not something like pertussis or polio, unlikely but possible, thanks CIA.

Not *quite* what I'd like to say to the CIA... :/

Put the blame on the FBI here; the CIA has known the deal with Trump for quite some time, and a battle between Trump and the CIA is brewing.

Actually, if the OP is thinking of what I am thinking, it's a gripe over reduced vaccine uptake after the CIA went around taking DNA samples, pretending to be vaccinating children, during the great bin Laden hunt.
Thanks is not part of anything that I'd have to say to them over that one, although what words I would select are unfit for polite company.

Dismantle the Vaccine Court and you will end vaccine practice as we know it.

Won't happen. Trump has some significant holdings in Pharmaceutical firms, some of which manufacture vaccines. Any loss of money negatively impacts his self-esteem, so he'd not risk that kind of damage.

If Trump manages to discredit or discrouage vaccinations in the USA it's going to really mess up internatinal travel. We are going to have to demand proof of vaccination from everyone arriving from the USA. And, I suppose , the same for our residents returning from the USA if we can legally do this.

I just hope the next outbreak is not something like pertussis or polio, unlikely but possible, thanks CIA.

"The babies were fine until they were vaccinated" because you can't tell if a two month old has autism.

Can someone correct me if I am wrong on this? I thought that the approximate age range for autism diagnoses just coincided with the vaccine schedule. Much like how antivaccidiots refer to increased rates of autism being found but ignore that change being the result of the medical community recognizing lower-tier autism spectrum disorders.

a mix between science people and prominent Americans

For "prominent Americans", read "prominent Trump supporters". Flattery gets you everywhere with Trump. "Science people" also does not necessarily mean anyone with expertise on the subject (cf. the "scientists" claimed to think AGW is a hoax, who are almost always engineers and almost never have any background in atmospheric science).

thanks CIA

Put the blame on the FBI here; the CIA has known the deal with Trump for quite some time, and a battle between Trump and the CIA is brewing. It's a measure of how bizarre things have gotten that I'm actually rooting for the CIA in this battle.

Zach, that's mostly correct, though not necessarily because doctors can't determine if young children have autism but because people usually don't have a reason to check for it at those ages.
I've heard of cases (possibly discussed here at Respectful Insolence, actually) of parents who claim that their kids turned autistic due to vaccines, only for specialists to note autism traits or behavior when looking at things like videos etc. of the kid before vaccination.
Because parents won't notice the more subtle, early signs, they won't think of their child as autistic until it becomes more noticeable when the child is a bit older. At that point, they remember the child had their vaccinations a little while ago, and things go downhill from there.

Vaccination policy is important. But beware of the daily distraction strategy, in which publicly contentious issues are briefly touched upon. We wouldn't want the American public to actually concentrate on the subjects we are trying harder to dupe them on.

@J:

I’ve heard of cases (possibly discussed here at Respectful Insolence, actually) of parents who claim that their kids turned autistic due to vaccines, only for specialists to note autism traits or behavior when looking at things like videos etc. of the kid before vaccination.

The best known example of this is Michelle Cedillo, one of the Test Cases in the Omnibus Autism Proceedings before Vaccine Court. Her parents introduced video of her before her MMR to show that she had been fine before them. An expert pointed out that Michelle was already showing clear traits of autism in the video.

I just hope the next outbreak is not something like pertussis or polio

Measles and diphtheria frighten me the most. The former because it's so contagious and SSPE, the latter because, well, it's diphtheria.

Wow, there is a Machiavellian possibility I had not even considered! Dismantle the Vaccine Court and you will end vaccine practice as we know it. Damn, that is terrifying!

Few things,

1) Trump doesn't know what "anecdote" means

2) the Trump team issued a “clarification” saying that Trump was “exploring the possibility of forming a committee on Autism” but that “no decision has been made at this time.” this fits with his MO. Trump has been antivax for years, but more than anything he wants to be loved. Swift reaction from both sides of the aisle (which there was) resulting in a "walk-back" almost reads like they were putting out feelers.

3) Trump doesn't know what ACIP or anything is, so that was obviously all Kennedy talking, and Kennedy literally thinks the CDC Is the be all to end all of vaccine policy and decisions.

4) The backlash was...heartening.

5) This will absolutely result in more outbreaks, because even if the commission doesn't happen--which is more than possible considering how Trump is an epic clusterfuck already--he just gave a big bullhorn. Because I have officially reached "f*ck it" with regards to our coming dystopia, I will at least take heart in the fact that outbreaks mean job security for people like me, as well an many lucrative consulting opportunities. I mean, bootstraps and Ayn Rand all that nonsense, right?

Scientist, writer, and autism parent Emily Willingham on the Trump-Kennedy relationship:

Why Donald Trump And Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Make A Perfect Pair

These two birds absolutely belong together in the same nest, and their partnership should surprise no one, despite Kennedy's unflattering comments about Trump only months ago. They recognize a brand synergy opportunity when they see it, although given Trump's penchant for trolling people whom he sees as having insulted him, time will tell whether he's pulled a Romney on Kennedy. Unfortunately, if it goes forward, their pair bonding portends an erosion of public health in ominous ways that will befoul that nest for the rest of us.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2017/01/10/why-donald-trump…

New this morning from FiveThirtyeight:

Previous surveys also showed that the vast majority of Americans (of all political stripes) agreed that children should be required to get vaccinated and should not be allowed into school until they do.

But we live in polarized times, and there have been a few issues recently that — once ushered into the political limelight — have lost bipartisan support.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/will-vaccines-become-another-parti…

Orac writes,

Even if this committee never comes to be, it is more than bad enough that Donald Trump even met with RFK, Jr. about vaccine safety.

MJD,

I respectfully disagree...

President-Elect Donald Trump appears to be committed to vaccine-safety-perception and may be exploring a Presidential committee on vaccinations as a means to resolve the end-less autism/vaccine debate.

Committee members that are considered "rivals" has historically worked quite well (e.g., Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearnes Goodwin)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_of_Rivals

In my opinion, JFK, Jr. would be a valuable member of such a Presidential committee based on his vaccine-safety passion and notoriety.

Mistaking "passion" for blatant ignorance.....

I usually just lurk here, because I don't have the medical expertise of the regular posters, who usually say whatever I would have said better than I could say it.

I have real concerns about the impact that the Trump presidency will have on people on the autistic spectrum. First, there is the tone: he has expressed disdain for disabled people generally, and is employing a person who believes an autistic child's mind is "gone." In case you are wondering, it isn't: autistic people can have cognitive abilities commensurate with those of the neurotypical population. They can respond well to therapy, and in some cases can have lives that are completely normal and fulfilling by any standard, sometimes with a great deal of success. Their individual quirks can even be advantageous in some contexts. That will, however, be very difficult for them if the face a stigma as a result of their diagnosis. Trump looks like he will be encouraging that stigma.

And of course, there is the therapy. Who pays for it? For most people, it would be crushingly expensive to give an autistic child the intervention he or she desperately needs, particularly at a young age. The public school system is what provides the care for most families, and some schools do a fantastic job. Millions of adults in society today are probably on their way to jobs or on vacation with their families, instead of confined to institutions, right now, because of the contribution from public schools and early intervention programs. Remember that the next time you see a friend post a screed calling public schools useless centers of indoctrination.

Of course, our incoming administration was elected on a pretty strongly libertarian mandate, where practically every Republican running for the nomination was promising to drastically cut funding to the Department of Education, if not eliminate it altogether. They can do a lot of damage to the public schools' support for autistic children (and other special-needs children) by removing the federal agency that enforces rules intended to give them a shot at life, and yanking the funding they need out from under them.

I have had at least one conversation with a right-leaning acquaintance in which his response was basically "so what?" If it costs so much money to rescue these children from a living hell, a certain class of voters is perfectly content to let them rot. Trump may well believe that himself, and it certainly is consistent with the Ayn Rand-inspired philosophy that appears to be ascendant.

It may be worse, though. With RFK leading the government investigation of vaccination, who knows what anti-vaccine beliefs concerning autism will become federal policy? Will they listen to those who claim parents that vaccinated their autistic children were guilty of child abuse? Will they require hair-brained "biomedical" intervention? The fun thing about Trump is you can't predict what he will do. He will go from promising to murder entire families of suspected terrorists to promising to reopen factories to promising to revoke citizenship if you burn the flag at the drop of a hat. I would consider the "worst case" scenario I described just now as highly implausible, but with this president, it may be merely unlikely, and might even happen.

I am sure their trashing of the public schools will do incalculable harm, and that the average Trump voter will succeed in remaining totally unaware that the harm has occurred. How odd that their concern for these children should be so ardent with regard to vaccines, which do no harm whatsoever and protect them from serious illness, while being so callous with regard to the work, funding, and support system necessary to allow them to pursue a life worth living.

President-Elect Donald Trump appears to be committed to vaccine-safety-perception

You're either stupid, or trolling really hard here. Or both.

may be exploring a Presidential committee on vaccinations as a means to resolve the end-less autism/vaccine debate.

I wonder why this "debate" persists. Do you have an explanation, Michael?

In my opinion, JFK, Jr. would be a valuable member of such a Presidential committee based on his vaccine-safety passion and notoriety.

Too bad he's deader than a doornail.

Chris: Then vaccine-preventable diseases come back.

At this point, the US deserves it. The voters wanted a fact free life, and they got it. I figure this year will be the year of saving up and working to get to Colombia. I have a sibling living there, and I figure I can get a job as a tutor for a while, hopefully being able to move into environmental protection or a clean water gig. No one in the US cares about any of those things anymore, and it's kind of wearing on me to go out knowing that most people around me are evil now.

MJD: You're as dumb as Trump, so of course you're praising him. I may have mentioned this before, but I really despise your weasel words about vaccines. If you're going to be against vaccines, own it, don't just mince about mouthing words.

Wow, there is a Machiavellian possibility I had not even considered! Dismantle the Vaccine Court and you will end vaccine practice as we know it.

That depends quite a bit on how extant cases would be weighted by state trial courts. I've noted before that in my less charitable moments, I'd just let the antivaccine brigade have what they think they want: years of real adversarial litigation, appeal, failure, and crippling expense. Moreover, consider the Volkswagen full of clowns that specializes in suckling at the teat of the trust fund.

The problem with doing that is the collateral damage. Vaccine manufacturers will not want to face the potential liability and the expense of defending all those lawsuits and could well stop manufacturing vaccines for sale in the US.

So he's going to head a commission about vaccines. What's wrong with that? It's a powerless chair into which to seat an ally. Head of the CDC? That would be a disaster. Given the choice between a fake disaster and a real disaster, feel grateful you got the fake one.

Even the appearance is bad enough - perception is reality, unfortunately....even more so today than ever.

Re. Mark @ 28: The problem with even a fake commission is that _anything_ that has a presidential seal on it or can even remotely be considered "by order of the President" or "a Presidential report" etc. etc.: any of those things will be used by anti-vaxers to justify not-vaccinating their kids, and/or pushing for bad changes in state laws, etc.

Bottom line is (aha! my Return key is working again!), it could translate to reduced immunization rates in certain parts of the US and thereby into more and worse outbreaks.

What's this about 2400 measles cases in Arkansas? If they're not all either over it by now or quarantined, that is a setup for nationwide spread, as in, epidemic.

Re. Autism: I suspect there's a bit of a culture war going on. High-functioning people with ASDs are notable for getting along well with others and not telling lies. People with personality disorders (PDs) particularly antisocial and narcissistic, are notable for manipulating others and being pathological liars. Thus there is natural cultural hostility between ASDers and PDers.

For some time I've thought that some PDers in high places have been quite happy for ASDs to become a de-facto "distraction squirrel" (and not at all gray!;-) to keep attention off PDs. Whether this breaks out into an _overt_ culture war remains to be seen, but I would suggest being aware of possible back-stories in the event of "mental health crusades" about autism.

I still wonder why a commitee, that is supposed to do science should contain prominent people. Unless they are prominent scientists in the field they should explore, they are just as useless as anyone else without any expertise.

Sheesh!

This outrage has sucked the life out of the Cleveland Clinic/Daniel Neides outrage.

Talk about anti-vaccine whack-a- mole.

Sadly, the Associated Press called RFK Jr. a "skeptic" in its piece.

Daniel Summers, MD at the Washington Post:

Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. just made pediatricians’ jobs a lot harder

But the implications of a vaccine-autism connection go beyond that. If vaccines genuinely cause autism like their opponents claim, one of two things must be true of pediatricians like me who administer them. Either we are too incompetent to discern the relationship between the two, or we are too monstrous to care. One cannot believe that autism is related to vaccination without simultaneously indicting the overwhelming majority of physicians, nurses and other medical providers in this country. Even your local Rotary Club is in on it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/01/11/donald…

So did Dr. Saad Omer in an op ed the Washington Post just published on its website. Actually, he called Kennedy an "environmental activist." https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/01/11/how-donald-…

I wish the MSM would just call a spade a spade. :(

I still wonder why a commitee, that is supposed to do science should contain prominent people. Unless they are prominent scientists in the field they should explore, they are just as useless as anyone else without any expertise.

I'm sure they'll be Top Men.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoy4_h7Pb3M

I’ve noted before that in my less charitable moments, I’d just let the antivaccine brigade have what they think they want: years of real adversarial litigation, appeal, failure, and crippling expense.

The problem with that approach is that, under US law, the plaintiff does not typically have to deal with the "crippling expense" part of that in this kind of case. There are plenty of lawyers in this country who would be willing to take such a case on a contingency basis. And unless the defense is successfully able to argue that the lawsuit is frivolous (as defined by law, not by the ridiculousness of the plaintiff's evidence), there is no mechanism for the defense to recoup their expenses from the plaintiff. A sufficient but not necessary condition for a lawsuit to be deemed non-frivolous is if it survives a defense motion for summary judgment, which one of these lawsuits will, sooner or later. There are, unfortunately, judges who will buy anti-vax arguments.

It is quite common for defendants in US civil suits to settle a case, even one they think they could win in court, if they think the cost of defending the lawsuit would exceed the amount they would have to pay in a settlement.

Multiply this by the thousands of cases that would likely be filed annually and you can see why many vaccine manufacturers would reasonably conclude that the US market is not worth serving.

This is especially true, as vaccines aren't exactly a high profit item. It's one of the reasons that we have so few vaccine manufacturers now in the US.

I say, if the antivaxers want us to join the developing world's childhood death rate from vaccine communicable diseases, let's also reintroduce smallpox and send them into blissful nirvana.
After all, nothing speaks of a loving God like a 30 - 35% mortality rate.

"The best known example of this is Michelle Cedillo,"

Second-best known is Hooker fils.

@25/Politicalguineapig: At this point, the US deserves it. The voters wanted a fact free life, and they got it....No one in the US cares about any of those things anymore, and it’s kind of wearing on me to go out knowing that most people around me are evil now.

I don't know if it would help any, but you know that Hillary won the popular vote by 2.9 million votes, right? Trump only won because of the ridiculous arcana that is the Electoral College. By any reasonable metric you can't say that most people support Trump (assuming that's what you mean by "most people around me are evil"), unless you're talking about literally the people in your area. But by that count I'd say that it's also not that accurate to say that the voters wanted him in office. He just is because of the system we have here.

Idran @ 40, the bear of it is, the electoral college was created just to prevent something like a Trump presidency from happening.
Alas, they refused to perform their duty to their nation, preferring to perform their duty to the extremists within their party.

I toy with the notion of a tax revolt by those who did not vote for Trump...
Too many to lock up, too many dollars gone from the budget to risk being withheld for long...

I say, if the antivaxers want us to join the developing world’s childhood death rate from vaccine communicable diseases, let’s also reintroduce smallpox and send them into blissful nirvana.

I sympathize with the notion of going Old Testament on these people's posteriors, but the collateral damage to innocents would be too high in this case. I got a smallpox vaccination, but smallpox was taken out of the vaccine schedule by the time I was 10, so anybody younger than 40--and even people into their early 40s--will not have had that vaccine, even if they or their parents were not opposed. Not to mention the damage to children too young to choose vaccination for themselves, or too young to get a vaccination even if their parents adhere to the recommended schedule.

If you could construct a plague that would affect these adult nitwits, and only these adult nitwits, then I would waive my objection.

PGP @25: Dude, again with the absolutism!
As w have discussed extensively before, VPD don't care who you (or your parents) voted for. On what planet is it a "fair punishment" for the baby of my friend (who voted for Hilary) to get measles from some anti-vaxxer's kid while he's too young to be vaccinated?

Talk about sins of the father. Adults (the people who can vote) will not suffer the consequences of an anti-vax administration. Children (who can't vote) are the ones who will suffer.

As tempting as it is to say "let them suffer the effects of their bad choices", it's not only the people who made the bad choices who will suffer, it's everyone else too.

Paul Offit MD at The Daily Beast: Paul Offit: Trump Needs Vaccine Experts, Not Conspiracy Theorists

Imagine you’re the president-elect of the United States and you wanted to know more about vaccine safety. Who would you turn to?

You could turn to Nancy Messonier, who heads a team of researchers at the country’s leading center for the study of vaccines: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Or you could turn to any one of a number of academic researchers who are involved with the Vaccine Safety DataLink, a computer-linked system of medical records that can determine vaccine-safety issues in real time as new vaccines are first used by American children. Or you could turn to a variety of leading experts, like Stanley Plotkin, who is the country’s (and the world’s) foremost authority on vaccines and has written the definitive textbook on the subject. Or you could turn to Walter Orenstein, former director of the National Immunization Program who is now at Emory University, and another worldwide leader. Or you could turn to Kathryn Edwards, a Vanderbilt vaccine researcher who has devoted her life to vaccine-safety issues and to the health and well-being of children.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/01/11/paul-offit-trump-needs…

Don't take the bait: http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2017/1/11/donald-trump-science-co…

If there's ever a Trump autism panel, with RFK Jr, Carrot Top, or anyone else chairing it, I'll eat my hat. Same for Melania's cyber bulling campaign. This trolling-in-real-life exists only to inflame and distract.

Eric @42: Oh, and me! I've been vaccinated against smallpox (I did research with vaccinia and it was considered a sensible precaution.)
Actually a lot of younger people got vaccinated against smallpox post-9/11 because of fears of bio-terrorism. But given that none of my friends or age-peers have had it, no, that demon can stay in the freezer.

I was vaccinated against smallpox as an infant and twice during my military career.

As far as I'm concerned, as we have the full genetic code of that virus, burn what is in those freezers.

I absolutely shrieked when I saw RFK jr at Trump Tower yesterday!
Oh boy! Orac and the minions will be having fun with this!

I just checked AoA and Jake for ( vicariously) orgasmic posts about their two heroes.

Meanwhile, television news ( at least) mentions RFK's position about vaccines decently.

Hey, they could have called him a "vaccine safety advocate" or "expert"

I'm not sure why health should be singled out as a public thing that the orange idiot is going to destroy. He's going to destroy public everything.

@MjD

"In my opinion, JFK, Jr. would be a valuable member of such a Presidential committee based on his vaccine-safety passion and notoriety."

I think that plane has left the building.

That's true, doug. But this isn't a political blog. It's a SBM blog. So it makes sense to focus on health related things here as opposed to say, Russian blackmail of the President-elect.

Unless they are prominent scientists in the field they should explore, they are just as useless as anyone else without any expertise.

Don't forget that some significant portion of the those who support Trumpelthinskin (I stole that) don't like real experts. Having noted that, I'm not convinced that Don (in the Corleone sense) Trump has the mental wherewithal to connect the dots. He may be thinking in those terms. He may be thinking that he can blame and fire pseudoexperts if he gets heat for the output of the committee. He may be thinking - but I doubt it.

Tangentially: are there any scientific disciplines that aren't under threat from the new administration?

Rocket scientists, maybe?

Trump is the best. Shaking everything up. Exactly why we voted for him. RFK is but the tip of the spear. There are 1000s more behind him and ready to support him. The fact that Trump knows the right people to talk to is BRILLIANT.

Trump knows the right people to talk to, they're his masters in the Kremlin.

You know, Theo, I can get people wanting to see the system shaken up. I'm convinced that's why Trump won.

But what you want and what you need aren't the same thing.

As a nation we want to see our government reflect our personal values.

But what we need is is a government that puts the general welfare first, not one that panders to wealthy special interests, cranks, and bigots of all stripes.

So it makes sense to focus on health related things here as opposed to say, Russian blackmail of the President-elect.

That's my Donald -- Always peeing on people. Is that somehow 'health related?'

I have not forgotten RFK Jr's flirtation with Louis Farrakhan, a racist of the rankest kind.
Farrakhan is a man whose every word withers everything he speaks on, like the poisonous breath of a mythological monster.
He holds racist views of white people, and is an anti-Semite unparalleled by anyone not under a swastika flag.
But RFK Jr., no, he's no more anti-Semitic than he is antivaccine.

Alex Jones will be taking the chair formerly occupied by CNN in presidential press conferences.

Rocket scientists, maybe?

Speaking as one: yes, even rocket scientists. There is talk of shutting down the part of NASA that deals with Earth observations--Trump is on record as saying that climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese, and scientists who use those data are routinely proven wrong. If the incoming administration goes further and implements their plan to focus NASA on planetary exploration, then heliophysics people (of which I am one) and possibly even astrophysics people would be frozen out as well. So some rocket scientists will be alright, but many others will be in a position like 1990s Russian scientists of facing the choice to sell sensitive technological information to other countries in order to be able to eat.

That's aside from the damage they can do to the National Science Foundation, which might otherwise be able to take up some (but by no means all) of the slack. Astrophysicists may not have to worry as much about this, but everybody else who might be frozen out by Trump's NASA gets their NSF funding from a single directorate.

NASA deserves it! At least, until the come clean on the moon landing hoax and that flying saucer they've been keeping at Area 51. Trump will reveal all!

Orac should have said "dismantling of CORRUPT public health begins"
It does not take a PhD in immunology to stop corruption at the CDC. Just common sense. And a law degree that RFK has, can't hurt.

After meeting with President-elect Donald Trump at Trump Tower Tuesday, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. told reporters that Trump has asked him to “chair a commission on vaccination safety and scientific integrity” and that he has accepted.

A short time later...

the Trump team issued a “clarification” saying that Trump was “exploring the possibility of forming a committee on Autism” but that “no decision has been made at this time.”

Either RFK Jr is hallucinating (not a stretch, IMHO) or TRump is operating with his usual level of integrity.

Could it be that TRump changed his mind because of the bad press? One can hope.

Mark Thorson got it right. The committee, if there ever is one, with be no more than a dog and pony show that gets a below the fold mention on the day it's announced and is never heard from again. This is standard organizational SOP for policy issues you have appear to care about, but don't want to touch in actual action with a ten foot pole.

And at least Orac noted the possibility probability that habitual lying POS RFKJ is lying about whatever passed between him and The Donald, just like Andy Wakefield is lying about his 'meeting' with Trump. What actually happened was a small group of moneyed anti-vaxers scored 45 minutes with Trump at a big fundraiser (which he no doubt used to hit them up for campaign funds), and dragged Andy along for a photo op.

Touch the Vaccine Court? Please. The largest sector of Trump's personal portfolio was (is?) pharma stocks, and Tom Price is a pharma shill extraordinaire. Like Trump's going to do anything that could cost his actual whale backers money.

The only way the AVs get any pub outside their own social media bubble these days is tossing out BS as bait for chicken-little panic articles by 'science' scribes. And Trump? Well he's a master at belching back-projection phantom fireballs as part of big-screen fantasy dramatics to keep everyone from looking at the men pulling the levers behind the curtain. He feeds off anyone he can cast as an enemy, and this response is Exactly What He Wants.

And at least Orac noted the possibility probability that habitual lying POS RFKJ is lying about whatever passed between him and The Donald,

I can imagine a whole spectrum of possibilities, all the way from "RFK Jr fantasising the entire deal", to "Trump taking advantage of the lack of witnesses and written record to make a firm verbal promise to RFK Jr that he had no intention of keeping" . The effect is the same... Kennedy becomes another courtier dancing attendance on Trump, offering more and more concessions and more and more political support in the hope of receiving some watered-down fraction of whatever deal he thought he'd been promised.

RFK is but the tip of the spear.
Is Theo several links down in the human centipede of right-wing conspiracy-theory sloganeering? What say you, Google?
https://www.google.co.nz/search?client=firefox-b&biw=875&bih=581&q=%22R…

More likely one of the paid Russian trolls.

Alternate hypothesis:

Trump wants to show that he has "some Democrats" on his team, so he picks ones who are allied with some of his own positions (easy/obvious) "controversial" among Democrats themselves.

Then if RFK actually makes headway, and there are not major outbreaks, Trump gets to claim he was right about one more thing that "liberals" criticized.

And if RFK actually makes headway and there _are_ major outbreaks, Trump gets to blame them on "the Democrats."

Welcome to the Dezinformatsiya Dystopia.

RFK is but the tip of the spear.

More like the tip of something else.

Idran: I am aware of the electoral college, thanks. Doesn't change the fact that most Americans decided to be evil and stupid or sat on their hands this time around.

Justatech: Everyone's going to suffer, it's what America wanted.

@PGP:

Justatech: Everyone’s going to suffer, it’s what America wanted.

Fewer than half of the votes cast were for Trump, for crying out loud. How could this possibly be "what America wanted"?

I didn't realize that less than 50% of the popular vote constituted "most."

Is that some kind of "new math?"

Alex Jones will be taking the chair formerly occupied by CNN

That is just silly, Mark Thorson. It will either be Joe Biggs, Jackari Jackson, or (hopefully) the very capable and easy-on-the-eyes infobabe, Lee Ann Macadoo. Trump would sit up and take notice of her in the pool as she's got Yugge, um, journalistic integrity.

re Panacea and PGP:

It's true - a group of voters did want to 'shake things up':
some of those liked the Donald and some liked Sanders
HOWEVER many voters STAYED home.

Therefore, DJT got elected by a small proportion of voters
( IIRC 27%), smaller than most 'wins"; HRC got more votes.

At ant rate, right now his 'rating' ( pre-presidential) is about 37%; Obama's rating is 57%.
More people support individual Obamaian poliicies/ ideas than they do Trumpian notions.

And never forget that his themesong on the campaighn trail was-
" You can't always get what you want..... you get what you need" Jagger/ Richards
That may have been prophetic because he could never fulfill all of the ridiculous promises he made that often contradict each other.

HILARIOUSLY, Adams writes about Trumpo and RFK jr.

-btw- I MUST SAY IT!

re the top photo above:

What a pack of FRIGGING whiteys!

I mean, SERIOUSLY!

I'm white but at least I'm *interesting* looking.

These are the blandest, plainest most mundane, pedestrian ... MOR boardroom bullies, big-car -driving, etc.

Any other insults? Anyone?

More insults:

Rex Tillerson: what a SUIT!

( I won't call anyone an android because that is insulting to AI and I am probably one myself- -btw- we're all attractiver because who would build an awful looking one? "
Robot is derived from 'robotnik' - a worker. Not an insult')

Texas Big Man, Putin pal? Oily Rex?

Actually, the word robot came from the word robota, a form of non-free serf labor. The closest equivalent today would be akin to intermittent prison labor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot#Etymology

-btw-
"tip of the spear' sounds as if it describes a sexual act.

Any other insults? Anyone?

Pussy grabbers? Well, I guess that's only one of them.

I'd be having more fun with this if I wasn't freaked out about losing my health insurance.

Any other insults? Anyone?

A classic from Texas: All hat, no cattle. Literally true of George W. Bush (his "ranch" was nothing more than a set which he sold off shortly after leaving office), and figuratively true of Donald Trump, who isn't anywhere near as good a businessman as he wants people to think.

I've heard some people refer to VP-Elect Pence as "Mike Dense". He was formerly known as the dumbest man in Congress (he relinquished that title when he became Governor of Indiana). Counsel for the Fencepost Anti-Defamation League have advised me that comparing Mr. Pence's intellect to that of their clients would constitute slander against said clients.

Don't get me started on Pence, who singlehandedly massively spiked the HIV infection rate while governor.

Denice Walter writes,

Any other insults?

MJD says,

Please try and adhere to the theme of this popular Science Blog (aka, Respectful Insolence).

A personal insult based on the color of one's shirt (see post #72) is way out of line and should be grounds for auto-moderation.

In protest, I will avoid reading Denice Walter's next 4 posts.

Sort-of back on topic: The House of Representatives has passed a bill that could, among other things, affect the FDA's ability to go after phony medical devices:

The Supreme Court ruled in 1984 that the courts could only overturn rulings that were “arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion.” In other words, the courts would have to defer to the regulatory agencies in finding whether a ruling was justified. But the Republicans in the House passed a law that would allow the courts to rule without giving deference to the regulatory agencies. A Republican court could, for instance, overrule decisions of the Food and Drug Administration or the Environmental Protection Agency on concocted Constitutional grounds – say, by arguing that it violated the “takings” clause of the Constitution. That could cripple the regulatory agencies.

The bill is known as the Regulatory Accountability Act of 2017 (H.R. 5), and amends the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 to remove the requirement that courts defer to the regulatory agencies.

@Wzrd1:

THEO is actually Serbian American, if memory serves. He showed up here a year or two ago babbling about vitamins and the supposed vaccine-autism link. He also turned out to be an MLM fool. Best ignored, probably.

There's a really nice 35 page document that's been recently released that mentions Russian interests operating within the continental United States.
Beyond that document, I can't comment further, as it would violate a rather restrictive NDA.

@ Gray Squirrel

Three problems with your alternate hypothesis:

1. Trump seeks to appease no one. He goes for the jugular.

2. He's not going to appoint an 'environmentalist lawyer' to head anything.

3. The biggee. It's not just that he isn't going to do anything that could hit his friends in the pocketbook. It's that he's not going to do anything that doesn't fatten their pocketbooks. Rex Tillerson at State? 67% of ExxonMobil untapped oil rights are in Russia, blocked from drilling by the US sanctions imposed on the Putin regime in 2011. If those sanctions are lifted Exxonmobil and Putin personally each stand to make between hundreds of million and hundreds of billions of dollars. Trump's kickback? Who knows. if there was any way Trump could bank from anti-vax beyond what amounts to chump change from the likes of Blaxill and Larson, I would be really, really worried about the RFKJ meeting. I'm not worried about the RFKJ meeting.

Which is not at all to say vaccine uptake could be negatively affected by policy that is intended to make the fat even fatter. That would be the consequences of Tom Price's health-freedom, 'never question a doctor', de-regulation policy, or budget reversions affecting enforcement in the states, or whatever Betsy DeVos cooks up to transfer funding and students from public schools that would enforce the immunization requirements to home schooling and private charters that will turn a blind eye, diddle the records or whatever to get the tuition money from the AV parents.

"Any other insults? Anyone?'

Trump's look of glee is because Corey Lewandowski is about to dump a shower of Putin pee on Pence's pate.

Fewer than half of the votes cast were for Trump, for crying out loud. How could this possibly be “what America wanted”?

PGP math.

Orac should have said “dismantling of CORRUPT public health begins”

Public health is way more than the CDC, $hit for brains. And "disagrees with your crackpot notions" =/= "corrupt."

Trump wants to show that he has “some Democrats” on his team, so he picks ones who are allied with some of his own positions (easy/obvious) “controversial” among Democrats themselves.

I think Herr Doktor was close to right on when he said “Trump taking advantage of the lack of witnesses and written record to make a firm verbal promise to RFK Jr that he had no intention of keeping” . But why would Trump do such a thing?

Remember what happened with Mitt Romney. Romney was critical of Trump in the campain. After the election, word gets out that Trump is 'considering' Romney as SecState. Romney goes to see Trump, they talk, have a very nice dinner, and pictures are taken. Romney gets his hopes up, says nice things about Trump, then Trump, well, pissed all over him.

As noted above, RFK Jr didn't say nice things about Trump back in the day. See http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/robert-fkennedy-jr-donald-trump-republi…
(for some reason the Vanity Fair article referenced on this page wouldn't load for me) but here are a couple quotes -

"I think Donald Trump is dangerous, and he's deceptive, and he's a demagogue,"
...
"I don't think it should surprise anybody to see how well he's doing, because that kind of demagoguery is formulaic, and it's easy. There are buttons that you can push, of bigotry and xenophobia and prejudice and anger and self-interest and nationalism — false patriotism."
...
"And I think those are the dark angels that Donald Trump appeals to, and I very much hope that his campaign of hatred dies on the vine."

Nobody has ever accused Trump of letting such a thing being forgiven. I have no trouble believing RFK Jr called Trump, ask for some face time, Trump told him of all the great things they would do together, and after RFK Jr made it public, Trump says, very publicly, "no".

I dunno if there is going to be a Presidential committee on vaccinations or not. But I seriously doubt that RFK Jr will play any roll.

Of course, I have previously noted that this political season, I had been given the gift of anti-prophesy, so there's that.

If it weren't for the real human suffering it would cause, I would welcome an immediate repeal of the ACA. The Republicans would probably be kicked to the curb fr a generation.
They so don't get it. I heard the very scary Steve King (No, not the horror story writer. He's a pussycat.) defend dropping pre-existing condition coverage because people who didn't get insurance until they got sick were careless. As if people only have to get health insurance after losing a job, or aging out of their parents' insurance.
I would wish that the Republicans show a little compassion, but they already do.

Fewer than half of the votes cast were for Trump, for crying out loud. How could this possibly be “what America wanted”?

Not even that many votes were cast for Trump.

Remember that both parties ran the most unpopular possible candidates they could have possibly chosen. Both candidates had unfavorable ratings well over 50%, and often near 60%.

A good number of Trump voters were not votes for Trump, but were votes against Clinton. I think that if the polls at the time had shown the race being closer, the 'I hate them both' camp would have broken for Clinton.

But it won't matter to PGP. Her world is black and white. No grey, no subtlety, no nuance.

Fewer than half of the votes cast were for Trump, for crying out loud. How could this possibly be “what America wanted”?

Because millions of Americans didn't want clean water, health insurance, a non-nuclear future, etc. enough to get off the couch and vote. And that's aside from the Green
Party twerps who knew d*mn well they were giving the election to Trump.

ORD: I would wish that the Republicans show a little compassion, but they already do.

They show as much compassion as God does, which is to say, none for fully autonomous living people. It's kind of amazing, but while I could name you easily a thousand things that God hates, including stars, trees and clean air, I'd have a really hard time naming more than two things He likes. Satanism is beginning to make a lot of sense to me.

Johnny: You know what they say about the middle of the road? That's where all the dead armadillos are. Shades of grey are just a distraction.

PGP #93

They show as much compassion as God does

Which is more compassion than you express in your comments, as you think it’s OK to let everyone else suffer as well, regardless of own their beliefs.

Shades of grey are just a distraction.

Congratulations! That’s the attitude that got Trump elected, Politicalguineapig.

Think about it.

PGP's point of view reminds me of our Ukraine referendum, where most voters voted against an Europian treaty with Ukraine. Well, not even half of the voters took part in the referendum, so actually a small part of the Dutch were probably agianst the treaty. Still those who wanted the referendum, which was just advisory, and who were against the treaty and against the Europian Union, wanted our government not to sign that treaty, because of the majority. Probably part of the voters were just against the current government, against the Europian Union, or something else and most voters just stayed at home.

Tip of the spear like on the front lines piercing the opposition. You know what I'm realizing about you people you're all liberals in the medical field of the worst kind. Smug as fuck. There is like 10 of you and your gatekeepers of this blog. Your being led down the wrong path and you cannot even see it. Now your beloved Obama is being followed by Drumpf what a horrifying nightmare this must be for you. Then Trump chooses of all people RFK to lead the charge on vaccine safety which we all know cause damage in some kids. Your losing power politically and your foolish misplaced faith in pharmaceutical mysticism is cracking like an egg. You are wrong on all the issues. Its crumbling right before your eyes but you still cannot see it.
GLORIOUS. Best of luck maybe instead of praying to your God science you might want to have some humility and go right to the source. This wont end well for you.

Then Trump chooses of all people RFK to lead the charge on vaccine safety

Why is it that you mouthbreathers seem fundamentally incapable of getting your Kennedys straight?

If I were a vengeful person, I'd recommend Kennedy's forehead be forcibly tattooed with the following:

"After" is not synonymous with "Because Of"

"you’re all liberals in the medical field of the worst kind"
Yes, we're terrible for wanting patients to be treated according to the best information and resources available. Yes, I am a liberal, proud of it too. I must really scare you and all the know-nothings like you if you have this much hatred of us.
"Now your beloved Obama is being followed by Drumpf what a horrifying nightmare this must be for you."
Damn right it is. Obama is a man. Trump is an 8 year -old in the body of an adult.
"Trump chooses of all people RFK to lead the charge on vaccine safety which we all know cause damage in some kids."
I'm pretty sure you mean RFK Jr. and I'm guessing you don't mean vaccine safety harms children. RFK Jr. is a scientific ignoramus. Vaccine safety has been proven over and over again; he might as well head a commission to test if gravity is real. He could spend millions of taxpayer dollars dropping things over and over because he's sure there must be a loophole somewhere.
"foolish misplaced faith in pharmaceutical mysticism is cracking like an egg."
I believe in science since it works. There is no mysticism. Anyone who wants to make the effort can learn enough science to understand how we know the things we know. I guess it's easier for you to disdain actual knowledge than to make the painful effort to make your brain work to gain some yourself.
"instead of praying to your God science you might want to have some humility and go right to the source"
Science is not my god. Science is a way to approach the world and gain understanding of how it works. You can keep on praying to whatever you believe is out there or up there. I'm too old to have imaginary friends.

Theo, or is it THEO, I forgot to mention that RFK Jr. has teamed up over antivaccine ignorance with Louis Farrakhan. But then you'll probably find some way to rationalize it. After all, Farrakhan believes in a god too, and he doesn't really like liberals very much either.

@ JP. Eric Lund, sadmar:

Fine insults, all.
And yes, Wrzd1, I know about that.

Because there is but a week ( ONE WEEK!) until Trumpageddon/ Trumpocalypse, I think we should prepare ourselves for either a protracted war on reason or having field day for fledgling comics.

I tend to go with the latter as well as a great day for reporters/ political analysts.

But we will survive this. I wonder if Trump will?

MJD:

I doubt that Orac will place me on automatic moderation UNLESS I start peppering each comment with unfiltered curse words instead of f@ck, sh!t, b!tch
BUT I wouldn't ever do that.

And I was not discussing the ( so-called) gentlemen's shirts but their ethnicity.

-btw- all the hipsters on television are wearing pale lavender or rose.
Believe me, I know about things like that.

You should be very happy that the minions are not rougher with you and that Orac doesn't moderate you more harshly.

And go ahead, protest my next posts:
less work for me responding.

But we will survive this.

I might not.

Shorter THEO: Buy my stuff!

THEO is actually Serbian American, if memory serves.

Yah Iliya or Ilaya, but I have to rush (store, Shabbat, walking pneumonia).

Anyway, I think Washington State is in much better shape in terms of preserving the Medicaid expansion than Illinois is, even with the block-grant notion floating around. I looked briefly at Pence's embrace – with waivers – last night, and I'm not freaking out just yet.

@ JP:

I venture that you are more resilient than you think presently.
After all, you've come this far.

And you can always move to Canada and get free coverage or marry a nice girl/ guy with excellent coverage.

Plus you live in a semi-enlightened area which might provide assistance.

Let's try to look on the lighter side until all h3ll breaks loose or dogs and cats start living together in sin.

@ Narad:
Walking pneumonia? Oh no!
Do you have soup?

-btw- whenever I get really sick with respiratory and/ or GI distress, I find that canned pineapple ( don't laugh) achieves wonders.

(store, Shabbat,

Git shabbos! I've been meaning to ask my friend Howard for his mom's challah recipe.

If you're not freaking out yet, I guess I'll try not to. And you might be right about WA.

The reason people wind up in the middle of the road is that they're repulsed by both poles of Manichean oppositions. Observing the shades of gray – Johnny's observation, for example – is, first of all, just a more accurate mapping of reality. But it's also how you get out of getting run over in the middle of the road, since the wider the gray scale, the more interpretations there are on either side of the median.

PGP is conflating how we assess reality with how we judge it. For example, I'm very into distinguishing the differences all along all sorts of spectra. But having done so, there are still times and places where I will have to draw some lines, and stand on one side or the other.
https://youtu.be/Nzudto-FA5Y?t=27s

Chemmomo: Which is more compassion than you express in your comments, as you think it’s OK to let everyone else suffer as well, regardless of own their beliefs.

Here's the thing: no matter how often vaccines/ science/health insurance gets explained, people still don't want those things. The noise just gets louder, they still don't learn anything, so maybe it's time to just let things go, let the country go, and come back to the issues and the country in another generation. Or not.

I usually am pretty compassionate, but I've had it up to here with the whining, the do-nothing baby boomers and the sellouts.

Here’s the thing: no matter how often vaccines/ science/health insurance gets explained, people still don’t want those things.

Odd, I rather like vaccines, science and I love my health insurance, it's a platinum plan. I wasn't aware that either I'm not a person or I didn't want them.
Thanks for letting me know that, although I'm quite uncertain if I'm not a person or that I don't want that which I quite like.

I usually am pretty compassionate, but I’ve had it up to here with the whining, the do-nothing baby boomers and the sellouts.

As a trailing edge baby boomer, may I invite you to kiss my arse in Macy's window during the New Years Day parade?
Compassionate, you aren't. Abrasive as a scouring pad, you are.
That's OK though, scouring pad, meet aged corundum.
See you on New Year's day!
Until then, I'll be doing things.

Ralph Nader was not a mechanical engineer.
That did not stop him from improving auto safety.
You don't need a PhD in immunology to improve vaccine safety.

"You don’t need a PhD in immunology to improve vaccine safety."
True, but you have to understand the science and the statistics to have a hope in hell of doing anything meaningful.

Again, Ralph Nader is not an automotive engineer.
To clean up corruption, and let the real experts do their job without interference, you don't need to know science or statistics.

PGP 111

I usually am pretty compassionate

Yet, immediately before you claim this within the same comment you posted:

so maybe it’s time to just let things go, let the country go, and come back to the issues and the country in another generation. Or not.

Where’s the compassion in that?

@ Chemmomo:

In PGP, I hear someone who is very frustrated with the current situation ( involving anti-vaxxers and science deniers) so much that she is willing to give up entirely.

When someone starts therapy/ counselling in order to improve his or her life, often they confront a feeling of helplessness and envison seemingly insurmountable obstecles strewn across their path so they want to give up. It just seems too difficult a task, too large to even contemplate.

That's where the therapist ( or a cooncerned mentor, friend, relative etc) steps in and says-

" Maybe it's not as bad as you think'.

giving possible scenarios which might work out more easily, offering assistance in some manner, inviting the hopeless one to break down the task into smaller parts or get additional help.

Another tactic includes giving data that contradicts the hopelessness
:
e.g. most parents support vaccination and vaccinate their children

the anti-vaxxers seem numerous because they are LOUDER and post their swill everywhere. Some loons like DJT even give them a platform which winds up on television and in the news. SBM supporters read websites and blogs that showcase the loonies ( AoA, TMR, Jake et al) in order to debunk them and ridicule them

Look instead at vaccination rates across several areas. Not all of them are abysmal.

I'm sure that automotive mechanics get sick and tired of looking over malfunctioning cars but hey, it's his ( or her) job.

Your attention determines your world view. Our perspective is highly focused on the badness of woo.

And speaking of THAT devil..
Jake ( Autism Investigated) has a new post up about RFK jr's infamous article and two of Orac's people challenge him.

As sceptic and a psychologist I ask:
Does anyone think that jake is representative of graduate stui=dents or that his views would be anything other than reprehensible to most adults?
I think not.

-btw- pardonnez les typos s.v.p.

And no car was ever safe enough for Ralph Nader, which is a variation of the Nirvana Fallacy.

Ralph Nader made people aware of important safety issues.

But cars today are much safer than they were 50 years ago because of a combination of legal requirements, government and private testing, improvements in technology, and customer demand.

Ralph Nader made very little contribution to any of that.

And people still die in business and train wrecks.

But most of those factors have helped make vaccines safer than they were 50 years ago.

And none of them point to a need to scratch your itch.

"But cars today are much safer than they were 50 years ago because of a combination of legal requirements, government and private testing, improvements in technology, and customer demand."

You hit the nail on the head, several times. The legal requirements were a result of Nader's work.
Private testing, we don't have that vaccines. That is hugely important.
We don't even have government testing.
Customer demand. Yep, you can compare safety features and pick the safer car. The FDA lies to you that all vaccines are equally safe. So consumers don't choose vaccine brands. So vaccine makers have zero incentive to make vaccines safer.

"improvements in technology"
does not help in vaccines because of above socialist vaccine "market".
Example:

" O’Brien et al. [13] measured 7.4 mcg/ml of ovalbumin in
influenza vaccines in 1967. Goldis et al. [14] measured as much as 38.3 mcg/ml in influenza vaccines as recently as 2008. "
https://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/evidence-that-food-proteins-in-vacc…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader#Unsafe_at_Any_Speed
"A year following the publication of Unsafe at Any Speed, Congress unanimously enacted the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Speaker of the United States House of Representatives John William McCormack said the passage of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act was due to the “crusading spirit of one individual who believed he could do something: Ralph Nader".[13]"

Make that bus wrecks.

Jake's latest is a hoot.....

It does appear that he learned "investigative journalism" from the back of a cereal box....

@JP:

Git shabbos! I’ve been meaning to ask my friend Howard for his mom’s challah recipe.

It's really been straining my preparation abilities, as living alone allowed me to be happily yet preternaturally slow. Planning, shopping, and cooking before sundown is just a mad freaking dash. Being sick, I barely got in making peanut–sesame noodles yesterday, and that's dead simple.

@Denice:

Walking pneumonia? Oh no!

It was the pain from the (it turned out) ear infection that finally drove me in. We skipped the chest film, since I was getting antibiotics one way or the other, but let's just say that the entrails sputum was, ah, rather suggestive by then.

Do you have soup?

Coffee and diet ginger ale. There aren't many vegetarian soups that are striking me as particularly appealing at the moment, not to mention peering at cans for hechshers.

In PGP, I hear someone who is very frustrated with the current situation ( involving anti-vaxxers and science deniers) so much that she is willing to give up entirely.

Or blame-shifting misanthropy, whatever.

"To clean up corruption, and let the real experts do their job without interference, you don’t need to know science or statistics."
To clean up corruption, you have to know something beyond lies, pseudoscience, and self-promotion.

Corrupted science is pseudoscience and lies for vaccine promotion.

So, explain where all of the money comes from to bribe millions & maintain this global cover-up (including nations whose relations aren't the best with each other) for decades....because $30 Billion dollars a year in revenue (not profit, revenue), certainly wouldn't cover it.

why do you think corruption is so difficult to clean up?
The ROI is insane.

Chemmomo: Where’s the compassion in that?

It's acknowledging that we can't make people want things and looking at how we can use resources better. If people in say, Orange County don't want vaccines, than the vaccines get rerouted to a place where people do want them. If people in Louisiana or Texas don't want libraries, the books get moved to places where they are appreciated. People in the US don't want clean water? Fine, then maybe somebody in Europe or Asia does.

People in the US don’t want clean water? Fine, then maybe somebody in Europe or Asia does.

Sure, people in the US do want clean water though they don't necessarily want to purchase a Big Berkey water filter. People should have access to clean water but, did you know, there are local water laws in states such as California, Nevada, and Florida that forbid collecting and storing rain water?

All the while, the 'pristene' spring and deep aquafer water is, in fact, being exported.

The bottled water industry exports water in containers usually no larger than twenty litres.[4] But even that can be controversial - the multinational food giant Nestle was accused of attempting to “drain” the town of Hillsburgh, Ontario, of its water in 2012 and 2013, during a drought.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_export

And yes, Belgians and Chiners are lapping up our 'good' water while we get the stuff aldulterated with fluoride.

Are you one of those Fluoride nuts too?

You do realize that many areas have naturally occurring, and sometimes extremely high levels of fluoride - and it has been that way for a very, very long time.

Fine and good, Lawrence. But our water is fluoridated with hydrofluorosilicic acid; An industrial waste mainly imported from China.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPGZHQHsjD0

Jake ( Autism Investigated) has a new post up about RFK jr’s infamous article and two of Orac’s people challenge him.

I think it's cute the way Jake and both of his minions refer to friend Lawrence as 'Larry', as if they are trying to troll him.

Of course, we know it's all they got.

Are you one of those Fluoride nuts too?

Of course he is. Gilly is nuttier than squirrel $hit.

I find their childish insults merely amusing.....

Lawrence: Are you one of those Fluoride nuts too?

I'm not, but of course Gil-boy is. He believes any conspiracy theory that comes down the pike.

I just think that most of the US doesn't care if their water is drinkable or not. I know of only two places, Flint and Standing Rock that have actually taken concrete measures. Heck, Corpus Cristi can't be bothered- chemical spill in the water? I've never seen such a resounding collective shrug in my life.
What I actually meant was that people in other countries often do care about their local waterways.

PGP #130

Still not seeing any compassion expressed in what you posted.

Denice #117

Look instead at vaccination rates across several areas. Not all of them are abysmal.

Locally, last time I checked we had 1 PBE across two middle schools (about 600 students total) who will all eventually attend high school with my own.

But less a little less locally, I’m at the epicenter of two measles outbreaks and H1N1 within my children’s lifetimes.

PGP blathers on about withholding vaccines or education from portions of the US population without ever imagining the collateral damage inflicted on children whose parents’ beliefs support science. And, yes, that pushes my buttons.

I found out the hard way that one of my kid’s chickenpox vaccine works – another kid at the school had vaccine failure about a year ago. I supported both AB2109 and SB277 (sending emails to legislators and encouraging others to do the same) because I don’t want to put the rest of the vaccines to the same test (for clarification: SB277 passed before the chickenpox exposure).

I wish PGP would pay attention, and acknowledge that the real world is more complex than the boxes she thinks she needs to use to cope with it.

Chemmomo: How is giving people what they want not compassionate?

PGP blathers on about withholding vaccines or education from portions of the US population without ever imagining the collateral damage inflicted on children whose parents’ beliefs support science. And, yes, that pushes my buttons.

Hey, she only wants to take vaccines from you. She wants kicked out of the country.

PGP #139

How is giving people what they want not compassionate?

Read my reply to Denice (#138 as currently numbered).

You are OK with collateral damage, because you are not invested in future generations of children. I am. But even if I wasn’t, I still would not withhold vaccines and education from anyone.

Accepting collateral damage may be pragmatic, but it is not compassionate.

Johnny: Heck yeah I want to be kicked out of the country. I was already PLANNING to go to Columbia or Mexico anyway, so the INS will save me a plane ticket.

Chemmomo: What do you mean 'invested in future generations?' I don't want kids to die anymore than you do, but let's face it, progress is over in the US.

D'oh! Stupid typo.

PGP wants me kicked out of the country. I fit at least half a dozen pigeon holes that she hates.

Politicalguineapig #142

I don’t want kids to die anymore than you do

Then why do you post nonsense like

If people in say, Orange County don’t want vaccines, than the vaccines get rerouted to a place where people do want them.

(post #130)

You are advocating withholding vaccines from specific populations of children. What do you think is going to happen if you do that?

let’s face it, progress is over in the US.

I can’t accept that. Even if I did not have children of my own, I cannot accept that.

If I do, it is.

You know what? Maybe I should thank you. The horrible attitude expressed in the comments you have posted here may be the thing that get that allows me to deal better with this mess in which we have found ourselves.

I just checked AoA and Jake for ( vicariously) orgasmic posts about their two heroes.

I really have to hand it* to D'Ohlmsted for this bit of Agnewesque wordsmithery:

"While it is too early to get either elated or dejected by current events, the trend-line is clear: Something's happening here."

* I'm undecided about the antecedent.

the trend-line is clear: Something’s happening here.

...and you can be sure the future's ahead.

Johnny: I'm sorry if I gave you that impression. You seem like a good person. However, please understand that I have to assume that most people I now encounter are not good people.

Chemmomo: Possibly that the parents would learn the errors of their ways and head off an epidemic? See, if an item isn't available, the perception of it's value automatically rises.Engineering artificial scarcities among the rich and non-vaccinating would increase the perceived value.

As would sitting in the waiting room for hours while all the parents and kids who vaccinate get to go ahead of the anti-vaxxers.

'You hit the nail on the head, several times. The legal requirements were a result of Nader’s work.'
What happened between the publication of "Unsafe at Any Speed" and the passage of the act you mentioned in your quote from Wikipedia? I would take a guess that the changes voted into law came from a review by actual automotive and safety engineers, and probably from the medical community as well. The mandatory seatbelt law was passed the year before Nader's book was published, the result principally of the efforts of Col. John Paul Stapp, MD, a USAF flight surgeon and a researcher expert in deceleration injury. He could advocate successfully because he knew intimately what he was talking about.
Ralph Nader has done some great things, but what he did was to raise questions, not to answer them. That required professionals with the requisite expertise.
As an example, New York City's 1970s examination of police corruption was headed by Whitman Knapp, a former Federal judge with years of law enforcement experience as a prosecutor.
A man with no real knowledge of science or medicine, no experience with administration of a large enterprise, no noteworthy experience as an investigator, and a declared bias is not a good choice. RFK Jr. has shown a clear bias that will cause him to slice and dice the facts to fit a conclusion he has already made, and if he's appointed, it will be by a president who shares the same bias.
No way in hell is he qualified.

"I would take a guess that the changes voted into law came from a review by actual automotive and safety engineers, and probably from the medical community as well. "

Once you ADMIT the problem, the fix is a little easier.
Why did it take Nader's book for a review by actual automotive engineers? The system was broken. Same for vaccines.

No one is expecting RFK Jr to DESIGN safe vaccines.
RFK Jr job would be get the vaccine establishment to admit we have a problem. Then the relevant experts can work on the fix.

Holy Mother of G-d, I nearly missed another AoA gem to ennui. John Stone thinks that he has personally been targeted by G—le.

Age of Autism is a sufficiently visited and prominent website to qualify for coverage by Google News but over the years I have come to view this stoically since my articles have a remarkable tendency to disappear, or to have been given a misleading caption of some kind. . . .
. . .
I sometimes wonder which agency or public relations outfit is liaising with Google about my articles, all of which are thoroughly researched.

Yes, he's upset that some weeks-old item of his isn't showing up in a news search for 'Scotland' + 'autism'. I understand that he must be very proud to have actually cobbled together something new for a change, but the man is simply delusional.

At any rate, I truly hope that my fellow and sister minions understand what I am trying to accomplish here-

RI has many, many 'bad cops' ( i.e. very vocal, hard@ss science advocates) and it needs at least one 'good cop'

I am a kinder, gentler anti-woo advocate

who is also trying to apply ideas that accompanied my education and training in psychology to increasing the peace amongst the minions

Someone has to do it- it might as well be me..

In other news...
Jake continues riding his hobbyhorse apace
Wait.. that's not news.

also not news
Mike Adams ( Natural News) continues his swill contra anti-Trumpsters.
Will be go after an elderly civil rights hero? Trump did.
Will Jake?

RFKJ is hardly analogous to Ralph Nader. Nader didn't just have a lot to do with auto safety improvements, but is basically the Godfather of consumer protection activism in general. In none of his efforts was he bucking scientific concensus, and Naderite groups like the PIRGs worked with legitimate researchers to make their cases for policy. Vinu is just being vinu in claiming Nader as some exemplar, which is to say, just spewing wanton BS.

American automotive engineers wouldn't have been doing squat to seek answers to safety problems if Nader hadn't rallied the public to very germane questions. Unsafe At Any Speed was focused on the Chevy Corvair, which was, in fact, a deathtrap. I had one for awhile, long after the controversy, and I knew I had to be careful driving it, and get the right kind of tires, The design flaw was much simpler than anything related to vaccines. Being rear engine, it had independent rear suspension. But the were only pivot-joints where the axles met the transmission – at the other end the wheels were fixed, and stayed perpendicular to the axles at all times. So, when the axles swung up or down from the center, the toe on the tires changed, and all hell broke loose. After Nader, Chevy changed the design to a proper pantagraph type, so the rear wheels stayed more vertical, but by that time, demand had dropped and the Corvair soon died. IT wasn't like that proper suspension was anything new that required 'science' to answer. GM had just told the engineers to keep down production costs, and that was one of the corners they had cut.

"scientific concensus"

Flat earth was a scientific consensus at some point.
The laws of science do not depend on how many people agree on something.

What happened to the "scientific consensus" behind flossing or stomach ulcers and stress?
For vaccine safety, even claiming scientific consensus is wrong. It is unscientific coercion at work. Researchers are afraid to speak about vaccine safety.

Flat earth was a scientific consensus at some point.

The earth is indeed flat! It's gravity that twists things around and make it appear spherical!*

TBruce, later screw-ups erase all successes? Why wasn't Einstein's Nobel Prize recalled when he divorced his wife, leaving her with an insane son, tons of bills, just to marry his first cousin? I could add more, but it'd be long and annoying.
Otherwise, we have zero heroes or champions, only "he/she was great, until X, decades later, which nullified those successes and we really should repeal those laws, be they law of nation or law of nature".
That said, Gore vs Bush POTUS, Bush was only slightly loathed, after, slightly more at the time than Gore.
Loved his internet task force thingie, it might actually pan out someday. ;)
Loathed a few major gaffes that anyone with an operational brain wouldn't make in his position. Some pie in the sky crap, totally off putting, then and now.
But, I do miss my Bushisms calendar. It got lost in the move back home. When it was still current, that calendar was phenomenally popular with both enlisted and commissioned officer alike.**

**At that point, I was a former enlisted military retiree, alas, sitting in a Major's billet.
Things got interesting when Bush the Lesser tried to make contractors subject to the UCMJ.
Blocking that cost me a small favor and a small contribution to a legal fund, it cost Bush a SOFA agreement that, alas, in 20/20 hindsight, might've been something highly negotiable.
But, the group consensus said that it was worth trading, lest the legal battle continue for a decade.
Peers network and work together.
The problem is, when incompetency is accepted, rather than evidence based competency is present. Once, we ignored our intelligence types that we relied upon under fire, we got a second term of an idiot as penance.
Do we really want a massive death toll from influenza, measles or polio within the US?
I'd rather have a nuclear war between Pakistan and India and I and my wife have close personal friends in both nations.
I'd not want either.

*Do the math on that one to get the physics joke.

Sadmar, I remember Nader's efforts quite well. Loads of noise, little success, gathered followers and branching efforts to achieve his many goals to protect consumers.
I also remember another rather unsafe car, my wife's first care, a 1977 Ford Pinto, the infamous flame mobile.
One problem with Nader was noise to signal, another, time on target.
Fortunately, as his popularity grew, people branched off onto the various targets and forced the addressing of them.
I fully expect to see most consumer protections rolled back under the incoming administration and current Congress.

Well, back to watching the tail end of Lucy. A preposterous premise, good acting and extrapolation upon the idiotic premise.
Want to see someone using 100% of their brain? See a grand mal seizure. Note when they run out of sugar to operate the brain halts the seizure. Save, in status epilepticus, which I'm thankful to never have witnessed.

So Nader killed the Corvair. Big whoop. He also screwed up Al Gore's chance to become president in 2000. Instead, you got GW Bush, who invaded Iraq on the basis of a falsehood, resulting in far more deaths than the Corvair was ever responsible for. Not to mention the delays in dealing with global climate change, which could potentially kill millions more.
Thanks a bunch, Ralph.

Flat earth was a scientific consensus at some point.

No it wasn't. In fact, thanks to Eratosthenes we knew millennia ago that the world was round.

He must have been a "pseudoscience anti-vaxxer" of his day. How dare he go against the scientific consensus?

He must have been a “pseudoscience anti-vaxxer” of his day.

He wasn't. He is still known as "the father of Geography".

How dare he go against the scientific consensus?

As I said, flat earth was never the scientific consensus.

"As I said, flat earth was never the scientific consensus."
Then what was the scientific consensus before Eratosthenes?

Then what was the scientific consensus before Eratosthenes?

That the Earth was shaped like a chicken?
http://imgur.com/9YJGArC

Then what was the scientific consensus before Eratosthenes?

The idea of "Scientific Consensus" did not exist. Eratosthenes died in 194 B.C. Nice try, though.

How did you come know about Eratosthenes' idea?
Because someone documented it. If people were documenting/reading then there can be scientific consensus. It may have been called something else.

"Flat earth was a scientific consensus at some point."
It was never a scientific consensus in the days of Eratosthenes because populations had little contact with each other and anything that could be considered scientific inquiry was rare and limited in distribution. There was only popular opinion for most of the world, and most of the world was not in a position to make the observation that most provoked curiosity about Earth's shape - that as a receding ship sailed to the horizon, it disappeared from the bottom up, just as if it were going downhill.
The development of modern science had to wait for the innovations of the Renaissance - the telescope, the microscope, calculus, the clock, high-quality glassmaking, and more. The word "scientist" itself was only coined some time around 1840 to replace the increasingly antiquated "natural philosopher".

Trump panel on vaccines more unlikely

In his response, the Republican chairman of the committee, Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, put it plainly: “Sound science is this: Vaccines save lives.”

The annals of “I’m not antivaccine,” part 22: The Godwin of "We didn't know"

oracknows — Fri, 25 Nov 2016 08:50:51 +0000

The annals of “I’m not antivaccine,” part 22: The Godwin of "We didn't know"

This post is a bit later than usual, but there’s a good reason for it. Last night, I was in full food coma, having consumed the traditional Thanksgiving feast, along with a fair amount of wine. Besides, even a sometimes arrogant bloviator like myself, who uses a pseudonym based on a fictional, near-all-knowing supercomputer from a 35-year-old British cult science fiction series needs a break now and then.

So today I’ll be, for the most part, slumming a bit today as I recover. What better place to look for material when you’re not interested in exerting yourself too hard than the antivaccine crank blog Age of Autism? And what better member of the hivemind that is AoA to take a look at than Anne Dachel, the “media editor” of the blog, who is best known for looking for stories about vaccines or the antivaccine movement and sending up the Flying Monkey signal to her minions to inspire them to fly over to the comment sections of those stories and drop their poo in the form of comments full of rabid antivaccine fury?

This time around, however, Dachel isn’t doing that. Instead, she’s decided to promote more antivaccine propaganda from the makers of VAXXED, the movie by Andrew Wakefield and Del Bigtree that is basically one long propaganda film disguised as a documentary promoting the “CDC whistleblower” conspiracy theory that claims that the CDC “covered up” evidence that the MMR vaccine causes autism in African-American boys. So I thought I would add to my continuing series of "The annals of 'I'm not antivaccine," because if there's one thing many AoA bloggers claim, it's that they are "not antivaccine" but rather "pro-vaccine safety." Then they go on to go full Godwin about vaccines, as Dachel does here.

Predictably, it doesn’t take long for Nazi analogies to pop up:

I clearly remember one time sitting in a train car in Switzerland talking to a German woman. She was fluent in English and very friendly. At one point she said she was sure that all Americans think the Germans who lived during the time of Hitler hated the Jews and everyone was a Nazi. I told her I understood the severe economic conditions that gave rise to fascism in Germany and that people didn't support Hitler because he promised to create a Holocaust of the Jews.

The lady went on to tell me about the wonderful things the Nazis did for Germany in the midst of the depression and the aftermath of World War I when she was growing up. As far as the Jewish situation, she empathically said, "We just didn't know what was happening."

I never have forgotten that conversation. Here was someone who was a little child in the 1930s and the Nazi provided her with summer camps and lots of fun activities. Granted, she didn't know back then what was really going on, but she knew all about mass slaughter in Hitler's death camps when we were speaking in the 1980s. Still, there were no expressions of remorse or horror at the outrages of genocide perpetrated by the Nazi regime, just the often repeated, we didn't know.

Autism and the connection to vaccinations wasn't even remotely in the picture back then, but they are very much on my mind today and everyday. This leads to me think about the future. Why? Because the truth has to come out, or we have no future. And when we wake up to the reality of the holocaust created on the high altar of corporate greed, what will be the response of those in positions to have known what was happening?

What about the doctors and nurses who witnessed horrible vaccine reactions? What about the researchers hired to design studies to cover up any hint of vaccine damage? How will they explain what they did?

Sigh. Here we go again.

Yes, it’s true. There was a lot of support in Germany for the Nazis in the early years of the regime because Hitler appeared to be delivering on his promise to make Germany great again. (Yes, the wording was intentional; I couldn’t resist.) People were going back to work. The Autobahn was being constructed. One thing that’s unknown to many people about the Nazi regime is that it enacted some of the most sweeping social programs in history. There were workers’ welfare programs, subsidized vacations, and welfare programs like Winterhilfswerk (“winter relief”). Of course, I can’t help but point out here that, although the Nazis called Winterhilfswerk a “voluntary” charity program, failure to contribute not infrequently resulted in—shall we say?—unpleasant consequences, such as social ostracism, loss of employment, and even worse. And, yes, there were summer camps for children.

Of course, the point of this analogy is that, in addition to the things the Nazi regime did that made it popular in its early years, the regime went on to launch what became the bloodiest war in history and commit many of the worst atrocities in history and advanced an ideology in which Aryans were the Master Race, justified in doing almost anything in order to attain their Lebensraum (living space), with Jews portrayed as the implacable enemy of the race, attempting to undermine its rightful goals at every turn. One result was that, when the war was over and the Nazis defeated, many Germans denied knowledge of Nazi atrocities and, like the woman in Dachel’s anecdote, claimed that they only knew about the good things. While that’s likely true of Germans who were children in the 1930s, it’s a harder line to take for Germans who were adults, because, even if most German citizens didn’t know about the death camps, the did have a pretty good idea that “resettlement to the East” was not a good thing for the Jews rounded up and sent East. Also, the sheer size of the German war machine and state ensured that millions of Germans knew what was happening to the Jews and others in the subjugated nations to the East.

So Ms Dachel, thinking herself clever, tries to make an analogy between the vaccination program and the Holocaust, starting with that old woman on the train who enjoyed the camps and activities the Nazis provided for children when she was growing up but knew, of course, from the rest of her life what the Nazi regime went on to do. Dachel, being Dachel, is not subtle:

I never have forgotten that conversation. Here was someone who was a little child in the 1930s and the Nazi provided her with summer camps and lots of fun activities. Granted, she didn't know back then what was really going on, but she knew all about mass slaughter in Hitler's death camps when we were speaking in the 1980s. Still, there were no expressions of remorse or horror at the outrages of genocide perpetrated by the Nazi regime, just the often repeated, we didn't know.

Autism and the connection to vaccinations wasn't even remotely in the picture back then, but they are very much on my mind today and everyday. This leads to me think about the future. Why? Because the truth has to come out, or we have no future. And when we wake up to the reality of the holocaust created on the high altar of corporate greed, what will be the response of those in positions to have known what was happening?

What about the doctors and nurses who witnessed horrible vaccine reactions? What about the researchers hired to design studies to cover up any hint of vaccine damage? How will they explain what they did?

Because saying “we didn't know” about Germany’s role in sending roaming murder squads (the Einsatzgruppen) into conquered countries to round up and kill Jews and partisans and in setting up death camps to slaughter millions of Jews and other enemies of the Reich with industrial efficiency are just like not accepting the pseudoscience of the antivaccine movement that promotes the conspiracy theory that the CDC and pretty much everyone in medical and public health professions “knew” that vaccines cause autism. OK, that’s not exactly what she’s saying. Rather, she’s engaging in a bit of wishful thinking, a bit of fantasy that I like to refer to as the fantasy of vindication, in which someday soon there will be evidence so compelling that the world will have to admit that antivaccinationists were right all along, hence the Nazi analogy. When that day comes, according to the fantasy, all those scientists, doctors, and public health officials will be like Germans who supported the Nazi regime dismissing its atrocities by saying, “We didn’t know.”

In an attempt to “prove” why health officials “should have known,” Dachel trots out a bunch of YouTube videos from the VAXXED crew in which various parents and others provide anecdotes of “vaccine injury.” She clearly thinks she’s doing the same sort of thing as when Allied officials, right after victory, marched German civilians through Nazi concentration camps like Dachau, Ohrdruf and Buchenwald to show them what had been done in their names. So what we get is an “integrative” pediatrician named Dr. Ramon Ramos spouting antivaccine views and “health freedom” propaganda:

We also get parental anecdotes. Such anecdotes, as I’ve described more times than I can remember, are generally full of the selective memory that is confirmation bias and the human cognitive tendency to confuse correlation with causation. They are seldom particularly convincing from a scientific standpoint, but can be very convincing on a human basis because humans instinctively tend to understand and believe compelling stories over data.

Obviously, for a tactic like Dachel’s Godwin, in which she likens scientists, doctors, and public health officials to Germans who later said, “We didn’t know” about Nazi atrocities, to have any validity, two things would have to be true. First, we would have to know that vaccines do cause autism and all those other conditions. Unfortunately for Dachel, scientists know that multiple large studies have failed to demonstrate a link between vaccines and autism, asthma, autoimmune diseases, and all the other diseases and conditions blamed on vaccines. Vaccines are effective and very, very safe, with serious adverse reactions being quite rare. Second, autism would have to be as bad the death and suffering caused by the Nazis. We know that’s not true.

The sad thing is that Dachel clearly doesn’t. Indeed, Dachel couldn’t have made such an analogy if she didn’t implicitly believe that describing the increase in autism diagnoses over the last 25 years as a “holocaust” is a massive and offensive exaggeration. The “autism holocaust” canard so beloved by antivaccine propagandists like Dachel does, however, show what antivaccinationists think of autism.

oracknows Fri, 11/25/2016 - 03:50

Oh, Ms Dachel, how blind your are.

she empathically said, “We just didn’t know what was happening.”
I never have forgotten that conversation.

If, like many antivaxers, you supported and have voted for the current president-elect, you most certainly have forgotten this conversation.

@ Orac

Yes, the wording was intentional; I couldn’t resist.

Actually, yours were the words of a resistant.

I know this has been said before here multiple times, but I can't help but feel for the children (and then adults) that grow up with their parents seeing them like this.

And willing to say it online and in videos, even in front of the child. Something the Vaxxed team encourages, also showing their deep contempt for these children.

It must be horrible to know your family scorns you so.

Just last month I was sitting at the kitchen table with an elderly friend of my mother who emigrated from germany as a teen in the 1950s. I can't even remember how the subject came up (probably something to do with the election) but she made some similar comments to the lady on the train in the story. We honestly didn't know how to react. I know this comment has nothing to do with anti vax stuff but the situation really shook both of us.

How in hell is there any equivalence between doing what is reasonable to protect your child and some kind of vile, racist killing machine? Having had most childhood diseases, I continue to be stunned. Whooping cough is nothing short of torture. Polio is a lifelong debility. Other diseases are likely to cause disability or death. Kids who didn't have herd immunity in some ritzy communities suddenly found their friends going deaf or blind. The real story is how an insidious piece of nonsense can and does cause real damage.

Sure, you may have an autism spectrum kid in there somewhere but the research we have shows it to be genetic and caused by a slip in your reproduction. Does this nonsense somehow absolve you of your guilt? I think not.

In addition to the Godwinning, there's also the parade of "(horror) stories," e.g.,

“[At the hospital], he’s still unconscious and then goes into a grand mal seizure that lasts two hours. [...] And this is a four month old baby. Finally a neurologist who was called in said, ‘Don’t worry, I’ll get him to stop seizing, he just might stop breathing.

Somehow, I don't see an ED allowing status epilepticus to simply go on for two hours.

^ I now seee that I missed two things:

1. Preceding the above quote, there is this:

He seizing and seizing, and they’re trying to give him Valium and different things. Nothing is working.

2. The account is from Sarah Bridges. I guess now I have to go look for the docket, but I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that the "eight year" OSM travail involves the OAP.

^^ Ah, thar she blows. Of course, as often whined about at AoA, teh records is seeled!!1! Maybe they could harass Ms. Bridges about this, like race traitor Terry Poling.

Anyway, if one looks at the dates of documents 1 and 10,* it appears to have been a straight Table injury, with some weird screwing around about $1000 while the terms of the compensation were worked out.

* Note also document 14.

I'm a retired physician with two adult children with autism, and I was a German major in college, with an interest in WWII history, especially of course the history of the medical profession's heroism and criminality during the Nazi years. (I've read Asperger's Habilitationsarbeit in the original German before it was available in English translation and was struck by his obvious effort to defend the worth of his autistic patients against the Nazi effort to eliminate "worthless lives.")

The connection I wonder about between the Holocaust and measles vaccine is whether a measles vaccine could have prevented Nazism. Hitler's behavior had been normal before his brother's death from measles, and it deteriorated afterward. The change has been blamed on the emotional impact of his brother's death, but frontal lobe damage from measles encephalitis is at least as plausible.

Narad, she has written a book about it all. The hefty tome of 220 pages, A Bad Reaction, was released last March by Skyhorse. The young man still has seizures.

I suspect the NVICP award was not a table injury, because seizures from DTP were removed from the table in 1995, the year she filed:
http://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/nvpo/nvac/meetings/pastmeetings/…

And a couple of reviewers thought a Craiglist ad was interesting. I cannot vouch for the veracity of the embedded image.

(I have an interest in seizures in babies, mostly because I had one... except it was before any vaccines, and the children's hospital administered an effective medication shortly after he arrived in their emergency department, he was weaned off of the meds a year later, only to have another seizure due to a now vaccine preventable disease: fun times)

""he’s still unconscious and then goes into a grand mal seizure that lasts two hours

How quaint.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsG06XnEJTg

@ Prof. Reiss #2

But this is what we must say, over and over and over, raising our voices higher and higher. Outside of the relatively small communities of pro-vax advocates and advocates for ASD kids and adults, the majority of folks who influence vax policy, both the publics and pols, are unaware of this dark heart of the anti-vaccine movement.

The moral argument against anti-vax is stronger, more clear cut (no apparent quarreling 'experts'), and has wider appeal than the scientific argument. Moreover, the moral issue plays an important role in how non-scientists assess the credibility of scientific arguments.

For the scientist, is enough to examine the case against vaccines and declare it without scientific substance. Non-scientists, however, are likely to be reluctant to rely completely on 'expert' consensus derived from scientific research methods they don't understand. They will likely attempt to place the 'science' of the controversy within wider contexts that 'make sense' of the positions in non-science terms. If they ask, "Why would these people be so vocal against vaccines if the vaccines aren't at least a bit of a problem?" it behooves pro-vax advocates to have something resembling a rational explanation of why anti-vax is so wedded to bad science, rather than just observing that it is.

The more I come into contact with anti-vax discourse, the more apparent it becomes that pseudo-science is a symptomatic effect, not a cause (in ideology theory terms, superstructure rather than base). I've commented a number of times that 'the vaccines damaged my child!' is the fundamental first principle that is just assumed and cannot be challenged, and that any set of ideas that build upon that can and will be developed, no matter how contradictory. If one of those mechanisms becomes undermined for any reason, another just takes its place, even if the two appear to be 180 degrees apart. But this observation, too, fails to address the 'why?'.

I submit, then, that the root of anti-vax pseudo-science is exactly fear and loathing of difference, more specifically fear and loathing of people with disabilities, and even more specifically fear and loathing of people with developmental disabilities. That first principle of 'the vaccines damaged my child' is, after all, itself rooted in the assumption an ASD child is damaged, broken, a 'blight'.

Third Reich propaganda labeled people with disabilities “life unworthy of life” or “useless eaters”, highlighting their burden upon society.

'Forget society, how about the burden on ME!'

Dachel has one thing right: those who stay silent in the presence of hate movements against Otherness will have some explaining to do. What then do we say now, to a revulsion of neuro-atypicality so perverse its adherents are willing to offer up not just their own children, but everyone's children, to the ravages of infectious disease, on the premise that removing contact with the developmentally disabled from their lives is worth the risk?

I suspect the NVICP award was not a table injury, because seizures from DTP were removed from the table in 1995, the year she filed

Thanks, Chris. I've had a pretty sluggish day after Thanksgiving, both physically and mentally. But we did have another dinner that couldn't be beat,* etc.

Again, though, nobody's whinging about the deepest, darkest "sealing" of the medical records.

* Actually, it easily could have been, as I'm fixing to move and just made the Moosewood spinach lasagna with a few extras for a friend, but that'll knock you right out.

Narad: ".... Moosewood spinach lasagna with a few extras for a friend, but that’ll knock you right out."

Sounds wonderful! I need to check that out, because I love a good veggie lasagna. One of the best we ever had was the one included in the "going home basket" from the community hospital after our first two kids were born.

Sadly it was not there when our third was born there after it had been absorbed by a larger medical group.

It's the bechamel one, not the other.

Narad: “…. Moosewood spinach lasagna with a few extras for a friend, but that’ll knock you right out.”

Sounds wonderful! I need to check that out, because I love a good veggie lasagna.

It's a good cookbook. There's an updated version that goes lighter on the dairy products, but I like the classic version. It has a good beer and cheese soup recipe as well, IIRC. It's been a while since I used it.

We're having a not-Thanksgiving tomorrow* and I'm making the sweet potato dish and also risotto ai funghi with the leftover half of the giant porcini I found earlier this week. (Sautéed the whole thing in butter and garlic, filled the whole big pan; saved half of the result.) Any pointers would be appreciated; it'll be my first crack at a risotto.

*JW family tradition.

@Zanthine, I'm of the somewhat rarefied group of tail end Boomer generation.
I've personally known and conversed with holocaust victims and with German citizens that were adults during that era, due to both life experiences in general and due to military duties that exposed me to the second subset of people.
Most weren't very interested in exploring, rocking the boat, to find out, lest they join the "undesired" population in the camps.
They also grieved over assuming the best intentions on the part of their government, whilst purest of evil was being distilled and perfected.

I won't judge them upon that Orwellian standard any more than I'll judge this nation upon the ignoring of protestors in North Dakota being drenched in sub-zero temperatures by firehoses and ignoring ratified treaties beyond count throughout this nation's history.
I will say, there was some slight intentional ignorance, ignoring "where *they* went" and ultimate fate.
As for service members, it was a World War, they didn't end their term of service until the end of that damnable war.
So, knowledge of what happened in the camps, a very small number of soldiers, considering all who served, was microscopic and likely, their terms of service never ended before the war was ended.

Something that I'm acquainted with, stop loss programs in time of war.
I was allowed to retire only because I had already signed out a parachute and was studying flight schedules of aircraft that I knew how to take off in and fly, landing, well, that wasn't a consideration for me.
My rich and retarded Uncle has plenty of such aircraft...*

*Both the experience with German nationals and holocaust survivors is true, as is my retirement.
It started to hurt *way* too much to put on all of that crap each and every morning, so I retired and Command held things up until I did precisely what was described above.
Had my retirement then still remained unaccepted, I'd have stolen an aircraft, flown it home and jumped at the appropriate location, hoping that a mid-air refueling actually worked, which was unlikely. I'm not a pilot, I got some odd cross training.
But, when one as four stars worth of General happy that one's on their side, enough said.
And of course, bad press, all around.
I never said that I played nice when crossed. I'm one who lies beyond the map edge, "There Be Monsters Here". ;)

Narad: "It’s the bechamel one, not the other."

Yeah, I figured that. I am not terribly fond of tomato sauces.

JP: "Any pointers would be appreciated; it’ll be my first crack at a risotto."

Lots of patience. I usually have everything prepared in advance, and then make sure I have something to sit on by the stove while I stir. I also have an mp3 player playing something in my ears, because reading a book gets your eyes off of the rice. By the way, you can step away for a moment or two... but don't make it a habit.

@Chris, you've not had *my* tomato sauce.
If it has yet to be granted its own food group, it's a mere oversight, but it's popular on five continents. :)
Yes, I'm serious on the continent count.

I'm coming due to make another couple of gallons, I'll see if I can e-mail attach a quart for you to try. ;)

As for risotto, yeah, a moment or so away only. Beyond that, things get very unpleasant to clean up.
I might make some again soon, I haven't for quite a few years, as my wife doesn't like risotto, but we now have a couple of guests that would enjoy it.
As they loved my eggplant lasagna (mix of lasagna noodles and eggplant, substituting ricotta cheese and Parmesan with Parmesan and tofu), they'll love risotto as well. :)

So many of the anti-vaxers are like that. They just can't resist the holocaust metaphor. Then they believe that someone who is Jewish like me is going to jump right in and agree wit them. Because of course the murder of a million Jewish kids is exactly like protecting kids against the measles!

This was sent to me on Facebook:

Dear Stacy Mintzer Herlihy,

I have a question for you.

These vaccine issues are an interesting conundrum, aren't they?

Normally, I have always believed that in any argument the truth never lies in the extremes and instead falls somewhere in the middle. However, it appears that when it comes to vaccines, both you and I lie on the extremes, on polar opposite ends, and neither would be willing to budge their views even slightly.

I only assume that you have viewed many, if not most of the Vaxxed live tour videos! In any case I am sure you are well aware of the thousands of vaccine injury stories reported by mothers and individuals.

I understand your claim that causation doesn't equal correlation and hope that you can respectfully understand that I believe "community immunity" doesn't exist, nor could it work.

Science is never settled. It is always evolving. That's the beauty of it.

I find the correlation of those Vaxxed kiddies who become sick with the diseases they were vaccinated against an interesting causation.

I particularly find the science of what aluminum and Mercury do to the body of particular interest.

By understand I mean I hear what you're saying but I don't agree.

But just for a moment, let's say the truth is actually somewhere in the middle. I have wondered how all of this settles with your Jewish heritage due to the holocaust?
I have the utmost respect for what happened to the victims in those concentration camps. I don't mean any offense by my question or any disrespect to your heritage.

My question is sincere. I'm sure you know the history of the industry. After Nazi Germany fell many of the war criminals traveled to the USA and began working for big pharma. So the ties are there, unfortunately.

In addition and most horribly are the people currently being experimented on by vaccines (which it sounds like you don't believe). But perhaps for a minute maybe you could consider that somewhere in the middle, that is the truth? Not fully anti-Vaxxer but perhaps the vaccines aren't quite as safe as the "science" states. After all, they recently halted use of the flu mist so not all is always perfect in vaccine wonderland.

Anyway, in case you had not heard, Dr. Suzanne Humphries sent out a thank you to the NYU panel. The reason she was thankful was because she likes to learn about the vaccine issues from both sides of the coins and she appreciated listening to the panel.

I do have a second question though...if you hate the anti-vaccine movement so much then why were you photographing yourself with your children in front of the Vaxxed bus?

That is a memorial since so many names of victims have been written on it. Regardless of your POV, those are mother's dead babies.

Would you have the nerve to say to a mother that lost her child in a drunk driving accident that you are pro drinking and driving? Because you bashed a mother who was standing in front of the bus who was there with her vaccine injured child. You bashed her and refused to listen to her POV. You mocked a memorial where dead babies are remembered.

I am not Jewish and I would never in a million years bash the holocaust or its victims.

Regardless of your beliefs, your actions are not OK.
Much love and may God Bless you,

one question.. that ended up being five. And, that's not all, act now and they'll throw in a lecture from an idiot, no charge

( although I really hate disturbing the serious mood following Stacy's comment)

Mikey A ( Natural News, the 25th) tortures logic and the English language whilst reporting about the onslaught of 'fake news'** that his own NN is indeed fake and compromised..

You know, sometimes I have difficulty keeping his bizarro world statements in their proper order so that readers appreciate the depth of Mikey's BS artistry. so again;

It's FAKE news that NN is fake
the NYT and WaPos report Fake News constantly and assiduously
Breitbart is meaningful and not fake
I heard similar dreck at prn.fm

It's the end of the world as we know it etc

** courtesy of the NYT and WaPo.

I know that all is well at RI when the minions come out to discuss food:

Oh well, it's Saturday that that ( usually) means that I manage getting someone to take me out to dine in style.
BUT I have not (yet) DESCENDED to the level of tweeting/ instagramming whatever I eat. at restaurants YET.
( I promise I won't EVER)

HOWEVER I had the great pleasure yesterday of putting a meal together using leftover poultry, pasta, mayo, wine, hispanic seasoning ( Sazon) and carrots which was servicable. Will wonders ever cease? I cooked.

Earlier, I visited the Russian store which purveys a plethora of exotic treats - although I don't often get the caviar or milk products. I picked up some expensive cherry jam labeld ( en russe*) VARENNYA ( I know the letters- believe it or not)

They had an entire freezer filled with pelmeni - dumplings.

I'm sure JP knows about Russian stores.

Orac writes,

“not antivaccine” but rather “pro-vaccine safety.”

MJD says,

In my opinion, it's clear that Orac and minions dislike both.

Name one pro-vaccine safety advocate that you've said anything good about?

RI pledge of allegiance:

I know and dislike all antivaxxers as well I should; and dislike pro-vaccine safety advocates as well as they deserve.

Name one pro-vaccine safety advocate that you’ve said anything good about?

Name one "pro-vaccine safety advocate" who has a reasonable definition of vaccine safety.

@ Stacey Herlihy
Sometimes there is no middle ground. The holocaust has happened and has taken millions of lives and vaccines have saved many lives and the don't cause autism.
Sometimes science is just that. Even if some theories of gravity are perhaps a bit changing, it still keeps us with our feet on the ground and we are not suddenly floating in the sky. With vaccines it is the same.

Renate,

I agree. And what "middle ground" can you possibly have on the holocaust? It was okay to gas "only" half a million Jewish children but a million was going a little too far?

Johnny asks.

"Name one “pro-vaccine safety advocate” who has a reasonable definition of vaccine safety."

MJD says,

Dr. Paul Offit

the leftover half of the giant porcini I found earlier this week

JP is aware of my envy.

I am entirely in favor of safe vaccines. It has, however, been pointed out that some people's definition of safe is unobtainable - effectively making them anti-vaccine. Also many people make claims of danger based on invalid or missing data. But valid vaccine safety improvements - who wouldn't be all for that?

Name one “pro-vaccine safety advocate” who has a reasonable definition of vaccine safety.

Hey, I'm pro-vaccine because I'm a safety advocate. Perhaps G-d will Bless her with some remedial composition classes.

So MJD says "Name one pro-vaccine safety advocate that you’ve said anything good about?", I ask for an example of a 'pro-vaccine safety advocate', and MJD comes up with Dr. Paul Offit.

You answered your own question, you dumb sumbitch.

Oh, that was MJD? Ah, well, killfile + nap can do that to me.

MJD @24 issuing a challenge to Orac:

Name one pro-vaccine safety advocate that you’ve said anything good about?

MJD @28, after being challenged to name a genuine pro-vaccine safety advocate:

Dr. Paul Offit

Orac has said a lot of nice things about Dr. Paul Offit.

And I see Johnny beat me to it.

JP is aware of my envy.

I was pleasantly surprised to find it; it's getting pretty late in the season for boletes especially, but really for too much of anything. I did find some very pretty witch's butter and some cat's tongue the other day, the same day I found the chanterelles. (I've heard you can make jelly candy out of cat's tongue, but I didn't pick any.)

Earlier, I visited the Russian store which purveys a plethora of exotic treats – although I don’t often get the caviar or milk products.

Oh, you really should get them more often. Russian jam is good, but it certainly doesn't beat caviar (I always buy the red, much cheaper), cold smoked mackerel, or real Russian kefir.

I’m sure JP knows about Russian stores.

Indeed, although I haven't been to one in a while. The nearest Russian stores around here are in Portland, an hour's drive away. I've thought about taking the train down to spend a night and a day or so, though, just for the sake of being in a city...

MOB (#30) says,

...some people’s definition of safe is unobtainable

MJD says,

Perfect, attempting the unattainable is admirable when it comes to vaccine safety.

The alternative is apathy and learned helplessness.

Johnny (#32) says,

You answered your own question, you dumb sumbitch.

MJD says,

Johnny, I answered your sentence from post #25 wherein you wrote, "Name one “pro-vaccine safety advocate” who has a reasonable definition of vaccine safety".

I thought the ultimate respectful insolence was unatainable but you've come close by calling me a dumb sumbitch (post #32). Congratulations Johnny!

Regarding what everyday Germans knew of the Shoah:
1) The people of German cities couldn't plead ignorance of Kristallnacht, and Berliners and others must have noticed the disappearance of 200,000 Jews.
2) Germans who lived near the camps used to "joke" that "the Jews come in by the gate and leave by the chimney." Not to mention that when the wind was right the smell of burning humans was unmistakable and awful.
3) Most of the mass shootings were carried out by paramilitary police battalions (in concept but not in practice like the French Gendarmerie), which operated as part of the army. They were generally free to request reassignment if they found the task too distasteful. They also were not stopped from discussing their task while on leave or in letters home. Officers' wives visited or were housed in areas of operation.
4) Like in any empire, the bureaucracy were heavily involved. The gas chambers and crematoria were subject to competitive bidding; the paperwork survives. Rail operators likewise knew what they were being asked to transport.
5) Since those being worked to death were sent on labor gangs outside the camps, they had to encounter farmers, quarriers, miners, loggers, and others.
I could list more evidence, but I'm nauseated enough for the moment.
I could add my resentment that the travails of my people (Jews) are being trivialized by comparison to the travails of my people (autists). I resent that the travails of my people (autists) are being used to demonize well-meaning and factually correct people.
Trust me, it ain't all fun being an autistic bisexual Jew, even in today's world.

Hitler's Willing Executioners is a good read on the matter of the culpability of "good Germans." I read the bulk of it in Krakow one summer, if memory serves.

JP, just keep stirring the risotto. Never stop stirring. What I do is I have a stand for my Kindle, and I just read, and stir. And stir. And stir.

We are partial to this http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/giada-de-laurentiis/champagne-risott… but I haven't made it since I gave up drinking. Will have to find another risotto recipe that we truly love.

Hitler’s Willing Executioners is a good read on the matter of the culpability of “good Germans.” I read the bulk of it in Krakow one summer, if memory serves.

Goldhagenl's scholarship leaves a lot to be desired. He started with his conclusion and then cherry-picked evidence to support it, or if necessary made citations up.

I read it largely as an enjoyable summer read long ago and didn't pick apart the scholarship, so I'm sure you're right. One of the main criticisms of his work, that he did not engage enough with the secondary sources, incidentally was the major criticism by my committee of my prelims essays. I did still pass, which is what counts.

They do want me to come back, too, G-d knows why. I suspect part of it is simple affection, as I'm quite sure I was the lovable f*ck up of the department, if a very good Russian teacher. There's a story I may once have told here about my oral defense...

My UM shrink, who still emails and calls regularly, is of the opinion that I should probably look for something lower key than academia, though he has not outright mentioned disability.

We’re having a not-Thanksgiving tomorrow* and I’m making the sweet potato dish and also risotto ai funghi with the leftover half of the giant porcini I found earlier this week. (Sautéed the whole thing in butter and garlic, filled the whole big pan; saved half of the result.) Any pointers would be appreciated; it’ll be my first crack at a risotto.

My pointer would be to ignore the spookiness surrounding the rice porridge. There's no need to pull up a stool and methodically torture polished grains if you're at the cooktop anyway.

Are you going to serve these two simultaneously? Is there anything else? Just figure out a timeline.

There was also turkey, stuffing, etc., and an aunt brought green beans and Brussels sprouts. The risotto went over well, though was avoided by fungophobes, despite my assurance that I know my IDs and has eaten the other half myself.

The sweet potatoes were whT for the rave reviews, for whatever reason.

As much as I guard against straw mushrooms (those do get me quite ill), most other fungi don't bother me and hence, I'll greedily consume them.

I made candied yams with thanksgiving dinner, fresh candied yams, after first cooking the yams in the pressure cooker, then finishing them candied in the oven.
One guest didn't realize that yams were available without a can, a realization that generated much humor. :)

Thanksgiving dinner had only two things that weren't fresh, a frozen bird and cranberry sauce from a can, as I couldn't locate cranberries locally this year.

HAD eaten.

@ Stacey Herlihy #27
Perhaps the way Turkey is thinking about the Armenian genocide? Something like: 'they decided to move and died on the way'?

@Renate #51, indeed, when I was asked how did the US know so much about genocide as to try to enforce halting it, I reminded the questioner that the US is a world renowned expert in genocide.
Ask the Cherokee, who also moved and died along the way.
Or dozens of other Native nations.

You may have heard the term immunity as it relates to your health before, but do you know what it actually means? When you have an immunity to something, it means that your body can fight that disease or infection without you knowing it. When you get sick, your body is fighting off a disease and you experience symptoms depending on what that illness is. Being immune to a disease means that your body is able to kill the germs without experiencing any symptoms. The memory b-cell and t-cell initiates the immune response and produces large amounts of specific antibody the agent of lasting immunity. A cell in the immune system that, when exposed to an invading pathogen, replicates itself, resulting in a more efficient and rapid response to any subsequent attack. You can acquire immunity by vaccination.

Vaccination is the use of vaccines to prevent specific diseases. Vaccines are medicines that contain weakened or dead bacteria or viruses. When a person takes a vaccine, his or her immune system responds by producing antibodies, substances that weaken or destroy disease, causing organisms. When the person is later exposed to live bacteria or viruses of the same kind that were in the vaccine, the antibodies prevent those organisms from making the person sick. Vaccines usually also stimulate the so-called cellular immune system as well. In other words, the person becomes immune to the disease the organisms normally cause. The process of building up immunity by taking a vaccine is called immunisation. Vaccines are used in several ways. Some, such as the rabies vaccine, are given only when a person is likely to have been exposed to the virus that causes the disease. Others are given to travelers planning to visit countries where certain diseases are common. Then, there are vaccines that are given to almost everyone, such as the ones that prevent commonly spread diseases.

Many diseases that once caused widespread illness, disability, and death wouldn't have been able to be prevented if it weren't for vaccines. In addition to those discussed above, vaccines are available for preventing anthrax, cholera, hepatitis A, Japanese encephalitis, meningococcal meningitis, plague, pneumococcal infection (meningitis, pneumonia), tuberculosis, typhoid fever, and yellow fever. Most vaccine-preventable diseases are spread from person to person. If one person in a community gets an infectious disease, he can spread it to others who are not immune. But a person who is immune to a disease because she has been vaccinated can’t get that disease and can’t spread it to others. The more people who are vaccinated, the fewer opportunities a disease has to spread.

Vaccination has many different advantages. The concept behind immunisation is similar to that of homeopathic approach of ‘like treating like’. In effect, the body is exposed to a little amount of the organism, causing a particular disease. Though the organisms are modified to make them safe enough for the body, they are rendered with the ability to create the specific infection. With this, the immune system of the body becomes active and produces antibodies to fight the foreign organism. This process makes the body equipped for fighting against the specific disease. This is because whenever the same organism will enter the system, the immune cells will recognise it and will mount an efficient resistance against it. Thus, vaccination works great deal in strengthening the immunity and protecting the body from fatal diseases. After learning about the advantages, let us move on the disadvantages as well.

Like any other medication, in case of vaccines too, there are certain disadvantages. There exists the risk of adverse reactions with vaccinations as well. Mostly, the reactions associated with vaccinations are minor in nature, including pain or swelling at the injection site, mild fever and irritability. In rare cases, severe reactions have also been noticed. However, the rate of occurrence cannot be determined as side effects are usually not reported and there is very less research being done in the area.

Vaccines are one of humanity’s greatest achievements. Firstly, vaccines
improve public health. Vaccines reduce the number of children dying, falling ill, or being disabled as a result of diseases. Secondly, they have many benefits towards humanity.Vaccines help healthy people stay healthy and in doing so help to remove a major obstacle to human development, they benefit not only individuals but also communities, and even entire populations.

Vaccinations have helped us develop economically, and socially. The economic benefits are the decreasing of very large amounts of money to be paid for treating diseases, that people would not even have if vaccinated. The economic benefits of vaccination extend far beyond the treatment costs that are usually included in cost-effectiveness analyses. Children whose lives are saved through immunisation programmes not only contribute to the economy but also bring social value to the community. Vaccination, and thus improved health, can yield broad benefits in improved cognitive development, educational attainment and labour productivity.

Laila Daghastani: "The concept behind immunisation is similar to that of homeopathic approach of ‘like treating like’."

Mostly true, except for that sentence. Unfortunately homeopathic "remedies" are diluted to absolute nothingness. For example "30C" means that the substance has been diluted by a hundred times the solute thirty times over. So the ratio of substance to solution is 1 to 10^60 (a 1 with sixty zeros following it, or one atom to more atoms that make up this planet).

Just do a search of this blog on discussions about homeopathy. You might also read many more articles on this blog to understand why your very long comment was unnecessary and not quite on topic.

Mostly true...

Yeah, and plagiarized from sites all over the web.

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm reminded of the story of the Trojan Horse.

Yeah, it does look fishy. Weird kind of spam.

I am not sure that it's worth arguing with a crank-site plagiarising copy-pasta-bot.

I'm guessing direct injection of the link to the essays-for-hire site failed. At least the wave of South African freshmen put some effort into things.

Perhaps the way Turkey is thinking about the Armenian genocide? Something like: ‘they decided to move and died on the way’?

I once attended a screening of a very tendentious film (I can't remember the name) which maintained that the Holodomor was the very first genocide in history and that's where the Nazis got the idea. They seemed to have plum forgotten about the Armenian genocide, or ignored it.

I made this point in the Q&A session after the film, and it was not a popular question with the Ukrainian diaspora audience.

http://www.henrymakow.com/i_was_a_corporate_whistle_blow.html

Mr. Abshear is spamming from an amusing website:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Henry_Makow

Something seems to have been disappeared from a Frontiers journal:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HbwvcA5lndIJ:journ…

Thanks, Narad. That is a terrible study.

Ah, HDB:

https://mobile.twitter.com/schneiderleonid/status/803210486707875840?p=v

Ah, the good Herr Doctor!

As well as the Goofle Cache, this weird abstract-only no-details document still exists in copies all over the Alt-medsophere, as antivaxxers have been all over it like [unsavory biological metaphor here].

ht_tp://www.globalpossibilities.org/the-results-from-the-first-ever-study-compa…
ht_tp://doctorbeau.com/the-results-from-the-first-ever-study-comparing-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-children-are-in-and-the-data-is-frightening/

It is exactly 4 years since Orac blogged about the rather, umm motivated, conclusion-driven nature of the survey itself and the people funding it:

It all sounds rather innocuous, but looking deeper, I find that this “study” is not much of a study at all. In fact, it’s just an Internet survey, and not even a particularly informative survey. Why it will cost $500,000 to complete, I have no idea. It sure seems like a lot of green for a relatively easy study. It’s not as though a bunch of people to interview hundreds or thousands of subjects are needed. You can even look at it yourself, as one can find the survey here and here. Its principal investigator is Anthony R. Mawson, M.A., Dr.P.H.. That name sounded familiar to me, and it didn’t take much Googling before it came to me.

The explanation from Frontiers is that the paper had been accepted but not published, so you must have hallucinated it. Also review is continuing:
https://twitter.com/HIVforumInfo/status/803191665607507969

I am further advised that the Editor at Frontiers for this opuscule was Amit Agrawal, who previously groomed the Geiers and Hooker as contributors to Frontiers;
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fped.2015.00085/full

while one of the reviewers (Linda Mullin Elkins) is a Professor at the College of Chiropractic at "Life University" ("visionaries of vitalism").

while one of the reviewers (Linda Mullin Elkins) is a Professor at the College of Chiropractic at “Life University” (“visionaries of vitalism”).
-- forgot to credit Dora @ HIVforum.

Regarding the Armenian genocide, Hitler is supposed to have said in 1940, "Who today remembers the Armenians?"
For years he had been declaring what he would do if given the power, and when he had it he did just that. Motive, method, opportunity.
A Shoah survivor was asked his advice for the present day. He responded, "If someone says he's coming to kill you, believe him."

My grandfather was present at the liberation of one of Dachau's satellite camps. Since some of the local Germans professed a rather dubious ignorance of what had happened, the US Army damn well made sure they knew, by conducting compulsory guided tours at gunpoint. Yet they had to have known. The stench alone was impossible to ignore.

Some of what the US Army did when faced with the horrific reality of Dachau would likely qualify as a war crime, based on what my grandfather described to me. But it would be very difficult to step away from that unimaginable level of horror and respond dispassionately.

Pardon me for adding to the horror:

Both WW's we're sponsored one both 'sides' by Goldman Sachs. Let's hope only 'to make money' . Which is already a horrible thought anyway (allthough I think there's more involved then financial gain - read about please).

Early vaccination (in the first) year of human life impacts the growth of your amygdala and subsequently inhibits your capacity to evolve and become an independent (thinking and acting for yourself), 'souvereign' human being. We are all different human beings and our reactions to vaccination (not = to immunisation) is different in everyone of us. We are not cattle.

Substances like fluor, heavy metals etc... where all part of the experiments in the WW camps to see how you can (mind) control, enslave people. Baxter (producer of -later-chemical fertilizer/bombs in the WW's) just changed their goals/marketstrategy and get's paid for spreading the know-how they gathered one these subjects. This was the start of the now called Western (evidence based (-;) non alternative/petrol-based synthetic medecine. (The holy grale of auto-immune disease to me).

Conspiracy?...FACT. Take a distance, read and try to think outside of set paradigma's.

Enjoy the ride.

PS: let's hope that all lives lost in both WW's on both side's are not just sources of grief, but become fountains of hope and peace...They deserve it.

Pray for a souvereign and peacefull world.

Peace to you all.

PPs: I do not wish to personally offend or grief anybody with these writings

@Matthias: Sorry. You are wrong. And pulling this kind of stuff on a blog where the author started out in refuting Holocaust deniers is not going to win you any brownie points. Your conspiracy theories don't work. Blaming Goldman Sachs for "sponsoring" WWII? Right. Hitler was just a lackey.

Go back and learn the facts about vaccines instead of the "FACTS".

Wonder who "sponsored" the meme vaccination-is- not-immunization?

I blame Galen.

I think you indeed can put this in the category of Holocaust but not 'denying' rather a scientificaly supported continuation. Let's hope not a conscious one.

Question: My english vocabulary is not that strong. Galen = Galenus?

Early vaccination (in the first) year of human life impacts the growth of your amygdala and subsequently inhibits your capacity to evolve and become an independent (thinking and acting for yourself), ‘souvereign’ human being.

Citation needed. And it's spelled "sovereign".

Matthias is so certain of his "FACTS" that he named Baxter instead of Bayer as a company that produced products in Germany during WWII. But I don't see what producing fertilizer has to do with military bombs. (Yes, I know homemade bombs can be created with it)
And he invented a new word: "paradigma"

Wonder who “sponsored” the meme vaccination-is- not-immunization?

I suspect it's pretty old, but it would be interesting to track down. It occurs in literal form in the subtitle of Tim O'Shea's The Sanctity of Human Blood.

Matthis @71: You said "We are all different human beings and our reactions to vaccination (not = to immunisation) is different in everyone of us."
Did you know that the response of different humans to "natural" immunization is also different? That's right. Some people get a disease and develop immunity. Some people get a disease and die.
That's pretty different.

"That’s pretty different."

Anti-vaxxers are like vampires that way. When you hold up a mirror to them, to apply their missives to their own beliefs, they see nothing.

Substances like fluor, heavy metals etc… where all part of the experiments in the WW camps to see how you can (mind) control, enslave people.

The canonical anti-fluoridation fabrication is that Nazis were fluoridating the water in concentration camps to keep the slaves docile (it can be traced back to an early-50s John Birch Society fabrication that it was the Soviets using fluoride for enslavement purposes, but the liars-for-the-cause embroidered the tale after deciding that Nazis were marginally scarier).

The idea that heavy metals were being administered in parallel seems to be Matthias Dewaele's own contribution to the level of discourse, and we should thank him appropriately.
Because there's nothing like like lead or mercury poisoning to increase the productivity of work-camp labourers.

I don't quite get it. Nazis supported vaccination and that is bad exactly...why?

Sepp: Because nazis, basically. Everything they supported must be bad,(this is also why fluoridation and psychiatry are bad) and the people saying this also generally don't study or understand history, or they'd know that the nazi establishment also liked homeopathy.
To me, it's always a bit funny that the anti-vax and anti-psychiatry organizations always say they're totally against everything nazi, but they love using anti-semitic slurs against people who call out their lack of facts.

The annals of “I’m not antivaccine,” part 21: Oh, wait, maybe I am antivaccine after all

oracknows — Fri, 05 Aug 2016 01:57:43 +0000

The annals of “I’m not antivaccine,” part 21: Oh, wait, maybe I am antivaccine after all

This is yet another in the continuing saga of “I’m not antivaccine,” a continuing series of posts demonstrating how the oh-so-loud and vigorous denials of antivaccine activists that they are antivaccine are in reality either a lie or self-delusion. There have been so many previous installments, twenty, to be precise. There could easily have been ten times that number. These days, I tend to take note of only particularly egregious examples. This installment, however, will be a bit different than previous installments because the actual speaker is antivaccine. She even says so. Why, then, am I featuring her, given that she openly states that she is antivaccine? Read on.

I’m referring to Laura Hayes, who gave an introductory talk before a recent screening of Andrew Wakefield’s and Del Bigtree’s antivaccine propaganda “documentary” VAXXED in Roseville, CA. The filmmakers behind VAXXED have been featured before in this particular series, because they do so frequently deny that they are antivaccine, while their movie lays down scene after scene of antivaccine propaganda and they themselves spew antivaccine tropes hither, thither, and yon wherever they go, even meeting with legislators to try to get them to “investigate” the CDC and excusing the murder of an autistic child.

Now, the filmmakers have Ms. Hayes introducing their film with a 12 minute speech:

She begins:

Thank you all for coming tonight! Please be warned that I am not going to mince words tonight as I welcome you. Perhaps if more people had not minced words in years past, my children would not have been injured by vaccines, one to the point of severe and permanent disability. I thank you all for coming tonight because it is going to have to be people like us…informed, principled, ethical, concerned American citizens…who are going to have to expose the horrendous truth about the always life-altering, often life-decimating, and sometimes life-ending vaccinations that are harming and prematurely killing our children every single day, not to mention, people of all ages. It is WE who are going to have to work non-stop to put an end to this ever-increasing medical tyranny, this abominable Vaccine Holocaust, this present evil.

There’s that word, “Holocaust,” again. Antivaccine activists do so love that word to describe the effect of vaccines. How many times have I heard that word slip from antivaccinationists who claim they aren’t antivaccine. Ms. Hayes, of course, makes no such claim. Indeed, she has argued in the past that you can’t be pro-vaccine and pro-science and stated that personally she has “no problem being called anti-vaccine” because she is, in fact, antivaccine and described vaccination as “barbaric practice that is not founded on any sound science.”

So it’s not surprising that she goes on to justify her use of the term “Holocaust” thusly:

For those who think “holocaust” is too strong a word, I assure you it is not. “Holocaust” is defined as “destruction or slaughter on a mass scale”, and that is indeed what vaccinations are doing to those who receive them, which can often be observed in the short term, always in the long term, and for generations to come as you will learn as you study these issues more. There is an ominous agenda underway, named Healthy People 2020, with the goal being to vaccinate all people, from fetus to grave, worldwide, with scores of vaccines and a recommended list that is ever-increasing…and that goal is in serious danger of being achieved. We must not let that happen!

Because preventing children from suffering and dying of infectious disease is just like what Hitler did to the Jews. Because autism is just like being marched into a fake shower in order to be gassed. Because health authorities are doing all this on purpose, just as the Nazis intentionally murdered millions of Jews and other “undesirables” and “subhumans.” I get so sick of this particular antivaccine trope. At least Ms. Hayes admits she’s antivaccine. Most of the people who use it deny they are antivaccine. (I’m talking to you Dr. Bob Sears.) The hypocrisy is astounding.

So let’s see what else Ms. Hayes says at the screening of this movie that is, if you believe those who made it, not antivaccine? Here’s a selection:

Many of us were duped and fell prey to the biggest lie of all times…that vaccines are safe, effective, necessary, and have saved millions of lives.

All of which is, of course, actually true (other than anyone being “duped.”) Vaccines are safe and effective, and they have saved more lives than any other medical intervention ever devised by the human brain. Truly, prevention is the best way to save lives, and vaccines are preventative medicine at its finest.

In case you don’t believe her, Hayes goes on:

When we began to put the puzzle pieces together, which wasn’t hard as so many of us had nearly-identical stories, we realized the horrible truth that no parent wants to learn…that we actually unknowingly allowed our precious children to be harmed, and in some cases, killed…by vaccine after vaccine…and in some cases, by just one vaccine…beginning on the day of birth (which is now actually beginning in utero), and continuing at regular and frighteningly-frequent intervals throughout infancy, toddlerhood, and early childhood…and which are now being recommended to be continued during every single year of a person’s life…with the annual influenza vaccine, booster shot after booster shot, and new vaccine after new vaccine.

Wow. That’s a run-on sentence to surpass all my run-on sentences, and I should know. Be that as it may, notice how at a screening of a film whose makers take pains to describe as not being antivaccine there is a woman introducing it who openly describes herself as “antivaccine” and basically blames vaccines for a Holocaust caused by doctors and the health officials who encourage vaccination. The language is apocalyptic. Vaccines are characterized as evil and frightening. Worse, to Hayes, they are thieves who have stolen her “real” child away and replaced that child with an autistic one, or, as she puts it elsewhere they are “transformed into someone who will be dependent on others for the entirety of their lifetime, never reaching what would have been their full potential, never living independently…perhaps never even using the toilet throughout their entire lifetime, but forever being in diapers…often living with great pain and suffering…”

To her, of course, it has to be the vaccines. It’s always about the vaccines, no matter what science says:

When we told our doctors what we had witnessed, and what we suspected was the cause of our children’s many health, development, behavioral, speaking, and learning issues…we were told, “Nope, it wasn’t the vaccines.” According to medical “experts”, it is NEVER the vaccines. They tell us the temporal association between the vaccinations and the onset of numerous problems was merely coincidental.

You know what I say to that ignorance, arrogance, utter nonsense, and blatant stupidity: Vaccines…the leading cause of coincidences in the world!

This is, of course, a common cognitive issue we humans have. We don’t realize that coincidences really are much, much more common than we realize. Think of it this way. Millions of children every year receive multiple vaccinations at intervals throughout the ages when autism is most commonly diagnosed. By random chance alone, there will be a fraction of them who exhibit the first symptoms of autism in relatively close temporal proximity to being vaccinated. So when a child develops the first symptoms of autism sometime after recent vaccination, the vaccine might or might not have caused it. We frequently say that correlation does not equal causation, but the better way to phrase this concept is that correlation does not necessarily equal causation, because sometimes correlation does equal causation.

So how do we tell the difference between coincidence and actual causation? We do science! We try to correlate autism with vaccination. There are a number of techniques by which scientists can do that. They could do a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to determine if vaccinated children have a higher prevalence of autism, but that would be unethical because it would leave the control group unprotected against vaccine-preventable diseases. Fortunately, there are epidemiological techniques that can ask and answer the same question. This has been done in the form of numerous studies trying to draw a correlation between vaccines and autism; no well-designed, well-executed epidemiological study done by reputable scientists has found a link between vaccination and autism. It’s not for lack of trying, either. Indeed, because of the pseudoscience zombie that will not die, the myth that vaccines cause autism, scientists are still doing variations of the same studies over and over again.

But you know that. At least, my regular readers know that. I could list the papers. I could delve into the studies. Here is not the place, however, as that is not my purpose here. My purpose is simply to illustrate one thing. Antivaccinationists who claim they are not antivaccine can easily be shown to be either lying or deluded. After all, if you’re “not antivaccine,” as Andrew Wakefield, Del Bigtree, and Polly Tommey claim to be, you don’t allow someone like Laura Hayes to give a 12 minute speech introducing your movie and refer to vaccination as “evil” and a “Holocaust.”

There’s a lot of that sort of thing going around among those who claim to be “not antivaccine.”

oracknows Thu, 08/04/2016 - 21:57

Tags

Antivaccine nonsense

complementary and alternative medicine

complementary and alternative medicine

medicine

Categories

Brain and Behavior

After all, if you’re “not antivaccine,” as Andrew Wakefield, Del Bigtree, and Polly Tommey claim to be....

Again: "'We don’t want to see measles not vaccinated [sic],' Bigtree said. 'I don’t think that’s an anti-vaccine message, I’d say that’s a very pro-vaccine message.'"

Hayes is merely a constipated version of Frompovich.

And to think, all this started with a bunch of lawyers who wanted to make an easy killing by scaring people into a class action suit by convincing people that vaccines were the next
Dalkon Shield, after all it worked with silicone breast implants...

You can be anti-vaccine as we know it, but be pro-inoculation!
Some people are wary of some of the vaccine ingredients. For example: Why use neurotoxic phonoxyalcohol instead of ethanol? Why use neurotoxic Thimerosal at all?

Surely, there has to be a way to create vaccines using non-toxic preservatives.

@ackley: first you need to prove that IN THE DOSES GIVEN that the ingredients are neurotoxic. Of course, given that you've listed Thimerosol, which is in very few vaccines, and in NO vaccine given to pregnant women and children (hint: single dose vials don't have it, only multidose vials), I suspect you're a standard hit and run troll. If you're not, come back and explain your concerns.

Well, I am not sure how else to explain the litany¹ of adverse effects. Perhaps it could just be due to a cytokine storm and not due to the preservatives.

Why not just use ethanol? Am I missing something? Does the Phenoxy group perform some kinda voodoo or something?

¹http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234367/

First, explain what a cytokine storm is and what can cause one.

Go back, take organic chemistry, and then tell me the differences between ethanol and phenoxyalcohol and why one might be preferred over the other. Or, try googling it. Then, explain why, IN THE AMOUNT YOU FIND IN A VACCINE, it makes a difference.

Linking to an article about a vaccine no longer in use (DPT) that was published 25 years ago does not speak well for you and your research. We do check references, here, to see if they are relevant and timely.

Oh, and correction: the article discussed the single measles also. But it's still from 1991.

I have taken Organic Chemistry you arrogant twat, and I did tell you why one would be preferred over another.

ackley, I don't know about phonoxyalcohol but ethanol is not enough to completely sterilize materials even in high concentrations. You might be able to wing it and simply replace the entire vaccine solution with ethanol, but at that point there's a good chance the vaccine itself might be destroyed. If I have to guess, the phonoxyalcohol would sterilize with a small concentration. Also FYI, ethanol is also neurotoxic, we just don't think about that when we drink booze.
Finally, the book you linked to is two decades old, is the vaccine referenced there still in use or have there been any improvements to the formulation so it's safer?

No, you didn't say why one would be preferred over the other. You just asked why one was used over the other. You also haven't addressed my other questions.

Namecalling. The refuge of the weak who can't answer questions. Sigh.

Cytokine storm??
Last i knew, we weren't inoculating people with live EBV.

For those who think “holocaust” is too strong a word, I assure you it is not.

I have so had it with these feckkneckles and their Shoah dress-up games.

Namecalling. The refuge of the weak who can’t answer questions. Sigh.

Coming right on the heels of the banning of "Annabel Lee", could it be... THE SAME PERSON!?!?!?

Why use neurotoxic phonoxyalcohol instead of ethanol?

As J #9 pointed out, ethanol is also a neurotoxic but a less efficient preservative.
In microbiology, we typically use a 70% solution to kill bacteria, viruses and the like. Less concentrated solutions would have a preservative effect, but we are still talking about 10-30% concentrations.
As my teachers told me, less than 60%, you are not strong enough to kill micro-organisms, above 90%, you will just dry them and preserve them until the next time you add water.

tl;dr: you are talking about replacing phonoxyalcohol by a shot of vodka. I don't think that would result in a loss of toxicity.

Surely, there has to be a way to create vaccines using non-toxic preservatives.

The reasons there are trace amounts of formaldehyde or thimerosal in vaccines is because those are used during vaccine manufacturing to either kill the pathogens the vaccine is going to be made of, or to flush and sterilize the system between batches.
If we want to avoid something like a repeat of the Cutter incident, a mild preservative won't do.

Also, "non-toxic preservatives" is a bit of an oxymoron. A preservative is meant to kill organisms (or at least seriously inconvenience them).
At the proper doses, even highly-bacteria-specific biocides like antibiotics are toxic for us (to start with, our gut flora is going to see collateral damage when we swallow an antibiotic pill).
Conversely, at the properly low doses, a number of nasty molecules are safely handled and eliminated by our liver and kidneys on a daily basis.

If you think thimerosal is bad, try sodium azide.

@Jay: maybe. If it is, the banhammer will come down. Orac hates sockpuppets.

Fallacy Man actually ran some numbers to reinforce Orac's point about coincidences, in relation to autism:

https://thelogicofscience.com/2016/06/28/why-are-there-so-many-reports-…

As to "the litany of adverse events...":

There isn't one. While adverse events can happen, the actual evidence is that serious ones are very rare. The way around that, as this blog shows here and in many other places, is to blame everything in the world on the vaccines.

As to “the litany of adverse events…”:

"Litany" is presumably used here in the sense of "ritual recitation, devoid of meaning, used for symbolic effect".

"Maybe"? See "Superscripts, Unicode."

It is because ethanol kills bacteria in a colligative way (think osmosis), whereas phenoxyethanol destroys bacteria by interfering with DNA synthesis.

@Narad: TBH, I don't have the geekitude to do that. I'm only a very little geek. :)

While I agree with you, I think it important to point out that the phrase "vaccines are safe and effective," is slightly misleading. Given the regulations and supervision of the manufacture of vaccines, they are safer than any other product in the U.S. Safer than other pharmaceuticals. Safer than food. And definitely much safer than alternative and complementary medicines. However, antivaccinationists claiming that the CDC and others have stated that vaccines are absolutely safe is simply not true. One can go to the CDC website and read the possible adverse events from each vaccine, both minor and the rare serious. And, by law, parents are given a Vaccine Information Sheet that clearly explains the risks from the actual disease and the possible adverse events. And vaccines are not 100% effective. However, for anyone who takes the time to learn about the risks from the natural diseases, the risks from vaccines are minuscule. Antivaccinationists see the world in black and white. Either vaccines are 100% effective and 100% safe or they are unacceptable. However, if they really adhered to this, then they would be afraid of everything. So, they selectively apply their illogical, irrational dichotomous approach only to vaccines.

I'm seeing more and more antivaxxers starting to use Trump-like and White Supremacist-like reasoning over vaccines. Vaccines are killing us, taking away our greatness, or causing some sort of holocaust or genocide. It's fear this, fear that... Us against them. Blah, blah, blah. They're all cut from the same cloth as far as I'm concerned.

The Jewish population in Europe was decimated by the Holocaust. A quick check online shows that their population went from 9.5 million in 1939 to 3.5 million people in 1945. In comparison, the population of children aged 0-19 years in the US went from 71.9 million in 1990 to 80.5 million in 2000 to 83.2 million in 2010. Simply put, Laura Hayes is a lying liar who lies. She is yet another example of lying anti-vax scum, just like Wakefield, Tommey and Bigtree.

And in some countries (e.g., Germany, Poland) the Jewish population was almost completely wiped out.

Laura Hates (whoops I meant Hayes) is probably a person who uses the Holocaust for her purpose while at the same time denies the Holocaust ever happened.

A preservative, as used in pharmaceutical products, is generally not intended to kill microbes but to inhibit their reproduction. The preservative must be compatible with the product - some things reduce the effectiveness of the preservative (preservative binds to something in the product or won't work at the required pH) and some preservatives can damage the product.

Ethanol is a poor preservative. The "minimum inhibitory concentration" of ethanol is about 9% for organisms of concern. Phenoxyethanol is about ten times as effective, with an MIC of about 0.9%. Formaldehyde is effective at much lower concentration, but there are compatibility issues. Thimerosal works well at 0.01% or less.

Phenoxyethanol is a common preservative in cosmetics. It is almost universally true that people who write on the web about the constituents of cosmetics spew complete nonsense about things they don't even begin to understand. Some of this seems to rub off on the anti-vax crowd.

.......
It's got Antifreeze in it!!! It's right there in the Other Name They don't want you to know: ethyleneglycol monophenyl ether - SEE! ethylene glycol !!!!

ackley@5:

I have taken Organic Chemistry you arrogant twat

Taken a bit too much of it too, by the sounds of things. Perhaps you could do some Organic Drying Out before you post again?

Joel A. Harrison@22:

Either vaccines are 100% effective and 100% safe or they are unacceptable. However, if they really adhered to this, then they would be afraid of everything. So, they selectively apply their illogical, irrational dichotomous approach only to vaccines.

Odd how we never hear about the Vast Big Motor Conspiracy to hide the truth on the unacceptable dangers of car seats and automobiles, even though those kill and injure way more kids than vaccines do. But I guess the thought of having to walk everywhere lessens their enthusiasm somewhat.

try sodium azide

Where, if ingested, the vomitus bursts into flames?? The stuff often used in mutation breeding? No thx, Helianthus #14!

According to medical “experts”, it is NEVER the vaccines.

This one is particularly annoying because not only is it patently untrue, but the antivaxxers themselves cite contradictory examples all the time - all of the adverse events included in the Vaccine Injury Table that the NVICP uses are there precisely because there's scientific evidence that they're causally linked to vaccination, even if it's only one or two excess cases per million vaccinations. It's just another example of antivaxxer projection: to them, it's ALWAYS the vaccines, so it follows that for provaxxers it must NEVER be the vaccines.

Awwww...it appears as though the troll disappeared under their bridge. And I was so looking forward to their rebuttals...

Hiding under a bridge after a rainstorm can be hazardous. The troll may have been swept away.

Seriously. F*ck Hayes and all the antivaxxers who misappropriate the Holocaust. The comparison is as (or more) absurd as Donald Trump comparing his "sacrifice" of being a successful businessman to the sacrifice of parents who lost a son in combat. I am so tired of the privileged white class pretending that they face such terrible adversity. F*ck them and their bullsh*t persecution complex.

Tony@32

Awwww…it appears as though the troll disappeared under their bridge. And I was so looking forward to their rebuttals…

Too bad. In particular I wanted to ask if they had even read the reference provided in #5; considering that reference concludes that of all the adverse events looked at only a causal relationship with acute encephalopathy was supported by the evidence. The others were either unsupported or do not have enough evidence. Hardly a litany.

For someone who has apparently taken Organic Chem I'm surprised ackley doesn't understand that you can't just add or subtract groups without any effect. Why don't we just drink methanol instead of ethanol? Does the extra methyl group perform some kind of vodoo or something?

That's how stupid you sound ackley.

Vaccinations are doing destruction or slaughter on a mass scales, the effects of which can *always* be seen in the long term?

How long? My parents are in their eighties, and they, like I, are brimful of every vaccine, booster, and flu shot we can get. That's a lot of decades between us all, but we are still waiting to see effects of mass destruction.

Perhaps by "long term" Hayes means "on the time scale of ferns converting into coal." No way to disprove that!

@Garnetstar: As a famous economist once said: In the long run, we're all dead. Despite the advances of modern medicine, life remains a condition with a 100% mortality rate.

It's easy to fall for the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. That's what most anti-vax crusaders do: they noticed that their (or their friend's) child was diagnosed with some condition (autism is the most common but not the only one) after being vaccinated, and jump to the conclusion that the vaccines did it. From there, a combination of innumeracy (looking at increasing autism rates without considering the possibility that it's diagnosed more often because more doctors know to look for it) and considering their autistic children to be not fully human (I'm not joking here--several anti-vax parents have made statements to this effect) leads to claims of mass destruction.

Now, the filmmakers have Ms. Hayes introducing their film with a 12 minute speech... After all, if you’re “not antivaccine,” you don’t allow someone like Laura Hayes to give a 12 minute speech introducing your movie and refer to vaccination as “evil” and a “Holocaust.”

Sorry, but Del, Phillipe etc. almost certainly don't have control over who may speak before screenings of the film. That would be up to the exhibitor, and 'Vaxxed' has moved from conventional theatrical bookings to screening-on-demand showings: some AV activist in a local community contacts a theater and gets it to commit to a single screening if-and-only-if they can get enough commitments for ticket sales online in advance. So, it's basically the local AV 'cell' putting on the show, and they'll get to put whoever they want to introduce it, since Cinema Libre isn't going to harm their already-a-lot-less-than-they-hoped-for rental numbers by adding some rider to the contract requiring them to approve anyone who might speak inside the screening space.

So, basically, what you have here is evidence that the hard-core AVs that are likely the base 'Vaxxed' audience left at this point clearly recognize the dog-whistles, and aren't troubled by Andy's new "just don't give so many so often" pose, as they probably know it's just BS.

The video of Lura Hayes was upped to YT by a user named 'Kathleen Roberts' who appears to be an all-in AV fangirl, posting any and every bit of vaccine smack she can find to YT, where it's viewed by ~50 people unless it gets some external publicity or link. The Hayes vid now has 565 views, and I wonder how many of those were RI readers who clicked through to get a dose of the delivery tone... With those figures, I can't imagine Roberts has any connection with the 'Vaxxed' gang, beyond enthusiastic adulation.

Despite the advances of modern medicine, life remains a condition with a 100% mortality rate.

Sexually transmitted, too.

I note that this gem from the original wasn't included:

Tonight, we are about to watch a documentary which has forever altered the landscape in our country and beyond.

Now, it's true that the aging plaster that was my bedroom ceiling collapsed shortly after I got up, but y'know, G-d made the Earth, but man made the Netherlands.

@Narad: TBH, I don’t have the geekitude to do that.

I was referring to "Phoebe C."'s discovery of them.

Prevalence, incidence, whatever:

The current figure for Autism in our country, which is outdated by the way due to using a birth cohort born many years ago, is 1 in 45 children! And in some states, it is even more alarming than that! 1 in 45…that is more than 2% of the children in our country! That is roughly 7,500 children per month, or 90,000 children per year, being diagnosed in our country with this debilitating, lifelong disorder!

This line from Orac "Worse, to Hayes, they are thieves who have stolen her “real” child away and replaced that child with an autistic one," made me think of old stories about babies who were stolen by fairies and replaced with changelings, and the only way to get your baby back was to hold the changeling over the fire.

In some ways these parents are following a path that is much older than vaccines. Once, it was fairies who stole your perfect child. Now it's vaccines.
(Really, your child was just never the way you wanted them to be, but no one's been stolen.)

Ha! I just found ackley over on The Pump Handle trying to blame Zika microcephaly on "Dtap" using a paper on a pertussis vaccine from 1991 that was looking at adverse events in children (not fetuses).

Uh, yeah no.

Article: ...this abominable Vaccine Holocaust, this present evil.

I wonder what would an anti-vaccine holocaust denier think of this statement?

And to think, all this started with a bunch of lawyers who wanted to make an easy killing by scaring people into a class action suit...

I'd say 'this' all started maybe 15 or so million years ago, as the evolution of primates began to select for the higher survival rates of creatures with:
1) Aversion to puncture wounds, especially those resulting in some sort of fluid entering the body.
2) Temporal pattern recognition of common post hoc consequences. That is, if a predator attack follows a rustling of the bushes, a quick-processing algorithm resulting in a decision to run away offers a survival advantage over examining all the factors that might make the bushes rustle.

Which is to say that it's 'natural' for human to be both afraid of needles, and consider being stuck memorable. It's also then 'natural' for humans to attribute any dramatic observed change to the most 'dramatic ' disturbing, and non-routine event that preceded it. And, sure enough, vaccination has been freaking people out since the days of Edward Jenner. Vaccination didn't become commonplace until the early 19th Century, or about four seconds ago in evolutionary time. I'm afraid that as a species we'll likely be stuck (so to speak) with a hard-wired wariness of it until civiization-as-we-know-it collapses after coastal population centers are flooded by rising sea levels.

Of course, for most people in industrialized nations, that 'natural' bias is overcome by education and socialization, and various other factors have to be in place in individual history and psychology to move it back into the foreground. But it was the existing suspicions of a vax-autism link, and the economic vulnerabilities of the relevant players, that created an opportunity for the lawyers to go judgement-hunting. Unscrupulous litigators looking for a big payday know they'll do better exploiting well-established angst than trying to gin up a whole new issue out of whole cloth. In other words, the money was already on the table well before the lawyers smelled it, and the lawyers were already on the hunt when Andy Wakefield first imagined the cash-pot that could be tapped by providing them some faux-science ammo.

until civiization-as-we-know-it collapses after coastal population centers are flooded by rising sea levels.

Yea; It's kinda like attack of the killer slugs where the bimbo that first showed her breasts only had 24 hours to move away a few inches. Puh-leeze, sadmar #45. Venice adapted. Besides, it is the natural variation mesoscale 20 ft in an hour that really makes for a bad day; And we haven't seen a landfalling hurricane of any strength since 2005 (I know, I know ... It could turn around tomorrow)--

a remarkable 27 major hurricanes have developed in the Atlantic basin, but all have avoided the United States. Klotzbach said the odds of none of those striking the United States is 1-in-2,300.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/08/no-major-us-hurricanes-in-11-yea…

There is another good reason not to use ethanol in vaccines. I'm old enough to have had a good many vaccines, including some no longer given; some hurt more or less than others, but if you've ever been injected with ETOH (I have - lab accident, not my fault either), you will know that it hurts like a sonofabitch, worse than the worst vaccines I ever had.

Speaking as a Jew who was born when the Shoah was still very fresh in the collective consciousness, I find every comparison to it which does not directly address events in Rwanda, Cambodia, South Sudan, East Timor, Iraq, Armenia,and suchlike to be obscene and offensive.
Vaccination is in no way comparable to violent genocide, even if antivax claims were real.

Offensive as the syringe swastika is, it is easily countered. How about a scalpel swastika captioned "Do you know who also favored appendectomies?"
Or this - "Do you know who also wore shoes?"
Or Hitler's picture with a caption of "Guess who was also a vegetarian?"
(Or should that read "veget-Aryan"?)

Sadmar, it's a sorry fact that Wakefield's so-called study was bankrolled with funds meant to provide legal assistance to child malpractice victims. Just one more reason to despise him as a tick on the body of society.

Speaking as a Jew

What's the over/under on a summoning of Sierra November?

Ha! I just found ackley over on The Pump Handle trying to blame Zika microcephaly on “Dtap” using a paper on a pertussis vaccine from 1991 that was looking at adverse events in children (not fetuses).

Yah, as I've noted, it's been fishing for attention at AoA as well.

Dr. Paul G. King (chemistry) makes a convincing indictment against thimerosal in a rebuttal of Dr. Stephen Novella: http://dr-king.com/docs/Thimerosal_Causes_Mercury_Poisoning.pdf

This analytical chemist contends that the use of thimerosal in vaccines is technically illegal and causes poisoning the doses uses.

How does one argue with an analytical chemist in this area? This man knows more about mercury toxicity than any one here, and has read all of the pertinent studies.

I know, we can attack his reputation!

He has been know to associate the the Geiers, right?

Hm, Annabel Lee mentioned anagrams. And "ackley" is an anagram of "lackey". Sockpuppet again?

@Stradlater: Sadly, neither a Ph.D. nor an M.D. is evidence of sanity. (I know this from personal experience as well as articles Orac has posted.) Not to mention that people can pretend to be things that they aren't on the web, or obtain degrees from diploma mills. Which is why a PDF on some guy's website is not admissible as evidence here. If you want to point us to a peer-reviewed publication, some of us might take your claim seriously enough to look at the paper and see whether the claim is justified. Not that a peer-reviewed publication will always be correct, but it's more likely than Some Guy With A Website.

@Eric Lund ...neither a Ph.D. nor an M.D. is evidence of sanity. (I know this from personal experience as well as articles Orac has posted.

You shouldn't imply that ORAC is insane here.

If you want to point us to a peer-reviewed publication
Dr. King's rebuttal has footnotes to 180 peer reviewed studies. Nearly every point that he makes is in reference to a peer reviewed study.

but it’s more likely than Some Guy With A Website.
This "some guy with a website" has a Wikipedia page and articles is chemical journals: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_G._King

Sockpuppet again?

It could be; Does Orac ban by IP?

http://www.vpngate.net/en/

He has been know to associate the the Geiers, right?

Dude is a commercial partner with scammers and fraudsters. Sadly, this does reflect upon his reliability.

He has a Wikipedia page?!
He's in there with Justin Bieber and Dick Tracey.

Well, I am almost done reading his rebuttal and I find his responses very cogent and informed.

He does make a damning case. You should read it!

How does one argue with an analytical chemist in this area? This man knows more about mercury toxicity than any one here, and has read all of the pertinent studies.

Easy, said analytical chemist is not a toxicologist and doesn't know jack about mercury toxicity. FFS, I had to stop with his claim that the DT vaccine doubled the cases of polio and used Neil Z. Miller for references. You seriously want to trot this dunderhead out as an expert?

This man knows more about mercury toxicity than any one here, and has read all of the pertinent studies.

I have co-authored two peer-reviewed papers dealing with mercury neurotoxicity. But Paul King has his own journal. so I guess he knows more.

Meanwhile over on: http://www.anh-usa.org/vaccine-science-is-not-settled-a-critical-review…
That twit "Vaccine Papers" has chimed in with this howler:

Thats a lot of children that did not receive MMR (64/357). Why so many? Could it be because the children were rendered autistic by prior aluminum-containing vaccines, and then parents refused to give the MMR to an already-damaged child? These subjects must be removed from the analysis.

Along with his obsession with healthy user bias.

I had to stop with his claim that the DT vaccine doubled the cases of polio

Why do you find that hard to believe? There are numerous cases of the Polio Vaccine causing Polio.

Not even the CDC denies the existence of Vaccine-Derived Polio Virus: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6423a4.htm

said analytical chemist is not a toxicologist and doesn’t know jack about mercury toxicity ??????

His MA was in Inorganic Chemistry. This man knows more about Mercury than anyone here. Stop trying to belittle him.

A. DT vaccine=diphtheria tetanus vaccine. Please reference any evidence you have of that vaccine causing polio.

B. Note comment above by Herr Doktor Bimler re his authoring two papers on mercury toxicity. Please retract your last comment.

Seems like Paul King's "FAME Systems" is little more than a home office producing whiny "rebuttals" to anyone in the media who doesn't buy into the vaccine-thiomersal-autism myth.
http://mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/051101_Thimerosal(49_55_%20Hg)CausesH…

Why do you find that hard to believe? There are numerous cases of the Polio Vaccine causing Polio.

Do please elaborate how a toxoid vaccine for Diptheria and Tetanus can cause polio.

His MA was in Inorganic Chemistry. This man knows more about Mercury than anyone here. Stop trying to belittle him.

Chemists aren't biologists; he's no expert in mercury toxicity as evidenced by his material.

Stop trying to belittle him.

To paraphrase Narad, we're not trying to belittle King, we're here to spit on point and laugh at you.

Note comment above by Herr Doktor Bimler re his authoring two papers on mercury toxicity.

I'm not making any particular claim to authority here. I mention the co-authorship only to make fun of people who resort to the Argument from Authority.
The real experts were my Brazilian co-authors -- they have the opportunity to study mercury neurotoxicity from various occupational exposures, such as the use of mercury in gold extraction.

Sockpuppet again?

Need I remind you of the canonical misspellings?

That twit “Vaccine Papers” has chimed in with this howler

I really ought to get around to sending out some E-mails inviting DMCA complaints regarding Dan "Vapor Genie" Steinberg's idiotically pompous piracy hobby.

His MA was in Inorganic Chemistry. This man knows more about Mercury than anyone here. Stop trying to belittle him.

Jesus, I don't even need to read up to the antecedent of the personal pronoun to ridicule belittle this comment.

^ Eh, I missed a vowel, so the Statler comment was a misfire.

I really ought to get around to sending out some E-mails inviting DMCA complaints regarding Dan “Vapor Genie” Steinberg’s idiotically pompous piracy hobby.

How so?

Apologies to the Herr Doktor, I didn't notice your comment about Mercury publications.

I finished reading Dr. King's paper, and I found it convincing. I will quote him as saying: " if the CDC is correct, more than 1
child in 6 is mercury poisoned to the extent that those poisoned children
exhibit one or more of the clinical symptoms of mercury poisoning. "

Does anyone know what he is referring to here? Is there really a CDC document with this ratio of Autism?

@Stradlater (53)

Your friendly anlaytic chemist starts by noting the introduction of a combined vaccine against Diptheria and Tetanus after World War II and notes a roughly 3 fold increase in polio at about the same time frame, and then does a massive Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy to blame the thimerosol in the former on the rise in the latter, with no citations to support causality or even more than a temporal correlation.

Then he does a big aside to gripe about SV40 which was eliminated from the polio vaccines over 50 years ago and is almost certainly not harmful to humans. At least it didn't hurt me and I likely received the contaminated version of the Sabin vaccine.

Then he asserts, again with no citation, that the vaccines infected practically everyone who received them with polio anyway (Gee, I must have been lucky) and just as many people died from the vaccines as from polio itself !?!?!?

After all that, I didnt' bother sifting through another 90 pages of unexplained or supported assertions to see if there might be a coherent syllogism in there somewhere.

He also seems to use mercury poisoning to refer to methyl mercury exposure, which I may have contributed to by donating some cans of tuna to a local food bank, and receiving a tiny amount of thimerosol which isn't even in most vaccines any more.

So, perhaps you can fill in one or two of the blanks.

Do you have any real statistical evidence of a difference in adverse events for people getting their flu vaccine in a multi-dose vial (which does contain thimerosol as a preservative)and those who got it in single dose shots?

Does anyone know what he is referring to here? Is there really a CDC document with this ratio of Autism?

No there isn't but don't you find it odd that all these "mercury-poisoned" children could be about and no one noticed? Additionally, there has been a natural experiment occurring over the last 15 years which is that thiomersal was removed from paediatric vaccines in the U.S. (earlier elsewhere) and autism prevalence rates continue to rise. Still find Paul convincing? When do you tell me how the DT vaccine caused polio cuz I'd really like to know that.

This analytical chemist contends that the use of thimerosal in vaccines is technically illegal

Oh, FFS, let's see whether he's as good at lawyering as at mercury toxicology.

Oh, G-d, it's this idiot:

In general, to clearly differentiate between my assessment comments and those of the author, the author's printed statements are quoted in a "Times New Roman" font followed by this reviewer's remarks in an indented“ Nimrod” font.

No, really. This babbling about fonts goes on for some time, as usual.

“Neil Z. Miller is a medical research journalist and natural health advocate. He is a frequent guest on radio and TV talk shows, including Donahue and Montel Williams...."

I think he's just cited Miller's bio, but I'm already getting distracted. No, 21 C.F.R. 610.15(a) is simply a repeated insult to the reader's intelligence; 42 U.S.C. 300aa-27(a)(2) is apropos of nothing, and those seem pretty much to be the sum total. I gave up around two-thirds of the way through because there was no blinking text to break up the rest of the disaster. (Word does that, right?)

Does anyone know what he is referring to here? Is there really a CDC document with this ratio of Autism?

The query would be better directed at the guy with "footnotes to 180 peer reviewed studies', who supports every claim with "reference to a peer reviewed study".

I really ought to get around to sending out some E-mails inviting DMCA complaints regarding Dan “Vapor Genie” Steinberg’s idiotically pompous piracy hobby.

How so?

That's "Vaccine Papers." He's hosting a load of copyrighted material.

@Science Mom

Here is a paper on Mercury and development penned by a Doctor in Toxicology: http://whale.to/vaccine/thimerosalisadevelopmentalneurotoxin.pdf

And for the Kennedy fans out there!: http://www.robertfkennedyjr.com/docs/ThimerosalScandalFINAL.PDF
breaks down to release neurotoxic ethyl mercury

Wasn't Ethyl his Mom's name?

Stradlater, you really need to get around to learning how to cite actual sources. Those from anti-semetic pig farmers and off-the-rails lawyers (as in not a scientist of any kind) will be heavily mocked. Now when will you also get around to telling me how DT vaccines cause polio or do you think that ignoring long enough will do?

@Herr Dokctor he query would be better directed at the guy with “footnotes to 180 peer reviewed studies’, who supports every claim with “reference to a peer reviewed study”.

I should have corrected myself before you did. The 180 footnotes are all for the 3-page chart towards the end comparing symptoms of Autism with that of Mercury Poisoning.

I assumed that the footnotes were for the body of the text, but they are not. There is not way for me to trace some of his assertions.

I am going to read the Kennedy paper next.

That’s “Vaccine Papers.” He’s hosting a load of copyrighted material.

I figured that's who you were talking about, just didn't know what he did to warrant a DMCA complaint. Please go for it.

I am going to read the Kennedy paper next.

In other words you aren't reading anything by actual experts, just massaging your own confirmation bias eh?
P.s. mercury toxicity doesn't remotely resemble any autistic features. That's coming from experts, not incompetent numpties like Kennedy, Scudamore and King.

@Science Mom

I know how to cite sources. That was obviously not an attempt to cite sources.

It has become common knowledge that the Oral Polio Vaccine causes Polio. Are you really going to make me find a paper on that?

It has become common knowledge that the Oral Polio Vaccine causes Polio. Are you really going to make me find a paper on that?

Oh FFS, don't even try that rot. King stated that DT vaccines caused polio and you're defending his drek and calling him "compelling". Well go ahead and defend that statement.

@Science Mom ... not incompetent numpties like Kennedy...

Huh?

I keep reading this meme: Four years later, in 1971, Lilly’s own tests
found that thimerosal was “toxic to tissue cells” in concentrations of less than 1 in 1,000,000.

But I cannot find a .pdf of the memo that it is credited to. Does anyone know if a copy of the memo exists online?

This is where the 1 in 6 figure comes from: https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/Committees-Councils-Sections/Co…

,Let's first get out terminology straight. Symptoms are subjective - pain, headache, etc. Signs are objective - they are the findings from examination, lab studies, imaging. In popular use they have become interchangeable, but in medical use they are not, or ought not to be.
Here's a quote from a Medscape paper. Medscape is a generally reliable source.
"The symptoms of mercury intoxication are manifold. Patients can present with complaints of numbness, tingling, hearing loss, visual difficulties, gait unsteadiness, and tremulousness, as well as emotional and cognitive difficulties. Obviously, assessing the risk of exposure, which can be acute or long term, is paramount to making a diagnosis." [http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1175560-clinical]. In other words, the symptoms are usually nonspecific, and require grounds for suspicion to cause a practitioner to look for it. The article then goes on to list the presentations of either massive acute or chronic exposure. So claiming that ”... if the CDC is correct, more than 1 child in 6 is mercury poisoned to the extent that those poisoned children exhibit one or more of the clinical symptoms of mercury poisoning" doesn't make any sense on its face.
By the way, just to be nitpicky, if I wanted to know anything about Mercury I'd ask either an astronomer, a space program historian, or a scholar of Latin classics. Questions about mercury are in the line of other kinds of scholarship.

Yah beat me to the Mercury joke, ORD! I was going to say King once did know more about Mercury than anyone here, having taken a vacation there flying coach on an astral plane, but before he could return to Earth he wandered to the wrong side of the orb and got a bit too much sun.

As for Mercury Poisoning, the Rumour has it this guy's the real expert:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Zi9QaA5yy0h

Broken link sadmar.

But I bet that it was the Waynes World Bohemian Rhapsody clip!

Minions:
Here's a Skepticism Begins At Home® quick 3-item test for confirmation bias:
1) Honest now, did you spot the bad-science claim Science Mom used above?
2) Now that I've pointed out there is one, can you identify it?
3) Can you explain why the claim is invalid?

No hints. No cheating. You have a half-hour to complete the exam. Go.

Strad:

Frickin' You Tube. Here's a different clip of the tune. If it gets another error embeded, its: youtu[DOT]be/ZABjqYgPuOI?t=4s

https://youtu.be/ZABjqYgPuOI?t=4s

Mercury poisoning can cause behavior abnormalities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thyJOnasHVE

Mercury poisoning can cause behavior abnormalities:

Like the inability to comprehend the difference between Diphteria-Tetanus vaccine and Polio vaccine? Even when this is repeatedly pointed out.

"Mercury poisoning can cause behavior abnormalities"

Which are still NOT autism...

And since you like the old argument from authority, autism assessment was a good chunk of what I did for a living and I worked in a service with a nationally, if not internationally, respected expert on autism...

a Doctor in Toxicology:

I am not familiar with this qualification.

I know the difference.

Though Dr. King was not being clear, it seems that he was associating the thimerosal in the DT vaccine with an increased rate of Polio diagnosis. He talks about the Salk vaccine in the very next paragraph.

Does anyone know how Polio was diagnosed in the 30's, 40's, and 50's? Is it likely that someone suffering from mercury poisoning would receive a "polio" diagnosis?

Sorry.

Doctor of Toxicology

Is it likely that someone suffering from mercury poisoning would receive a “polio” diagnosis?

Before sending anyone on a wild goose chase, which symptoms or signs do you feel are most similar between the two conditions, and the likeliest to be mis-attributed?

I know the difference [between DT and polio vaccines].

When Science Mom asked you "Now when will you also get around to telling me how DT vaccines cause polio or do you think that ignoring long enough will do?"

You replied: It has become common knowledge that the Oral Polio Vaccine causes Polio. Are you really going to make me find a paper on that?

The 180 footnotes are all for the 3-page chart towards the end comparing symptoms of Autism with that of Mercury Poisoning.

If two phenomena are the same, a pair of citations is sufficient. 180 footnotes suggests that a great number of very small cherries are being picked.
Only recommended if you are making kirschwasser or maraschino liqueur.

Late to the party I know.
Stradlater @82: You cited whale.to. I will now invoke Scopie's Law.
In any debate about medicine or science, citing whale.to as a credible source loses you the argument immediately, and gets you laughed out of the forum.
whale.to is the dribbling of John Scudamore. It hosts the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" a plagiarised fake exposed as such even before World War 2, Scudamore's belief that "Satanic Ley Lines" burnt his posterior and that dolphins can levitate and control gravity. If you are relying on whale.to as a source, you are a fool.

In my defense, I had not visited the home page of whale.to. The paper, written by a toxicologist, was linked through a different site.

In my defense, I had not visited the home page of whale.to. The paper, written by a toxicologist, was linked through a different site.

Fair enough, that get's him a pass in my book. Carry on :)

#100

That is taking JAQing off to a whole new level...

Seriously? Suggesting that mercury poisoning causes autism is bad enough, but polio?

If only there were some handy way of looking up the signs and symptoms of polio and also mercury poisoning...

I gleaned Dr. Lucier's "monograph" about thiomersal and in spite of his credentials, he falls into the same claptrap as others who buy into the mercury-autism mythos. He misrepresents legitimate analyses and uses EPA exposures. He also compares methylmercury to ethylmercury, pretty sad for a so-called toxicologist.

And now that Stradlater has found the source for King's 1 in 6 children are mercury poisoned, perhaps he'd also like to point out that glaring misrepresentation. Still waiting for DT vaccines causing polio. Put up or retract Stradlater.

@SM:He also compares methylmercury to ethylmercury

He does this only to establish a reference dose. The EPA has a meHG reference dose but not an etHG reference dose.

Ethylmercury
No toxicity reference values available.
https://archive.epa.gov/region5/teach/web/pdf/mercury_org_summary.pdf

@SM:Still waiting for DT vaccines causing polio
I honestly do not know why Dr. King found it necessary to make that correlation. There were many things that could could have accounted for the increase in Polio diagnosis during the years mentioned besides the DT vaccine.

meHg ↑
↑ etHg

He does this only to establish a reference dose. The EPA has a meHG reference dose but not an etHG reference dose.

That's a poor excuse. Is it all right to use the reference dose for methanol on ethanol?

I honestly do not know why Dr. King found it necessary to make that correlation. There were many things that could could have accounted for the increase in Polio diagnosis during the years mentioned besides the DT vaccine.

So what does that say about King's "expertise"? And that's just one glaring example. How about his 1 in 6 children mercury poisoned figure? Does he represent statistics accurately?

Stradlater, I'm a Ph.D. in inorganic chemisty, a synthetic chemist. I know a whole heap about mercury's (and other elements') reactivity and properties. That doesn't mean I know a damn thing about its biological activity. The body is a hugely complex reaction system, where what various elements may do is dependant on so many factors that they can't be assessed just by knowing the elements' likely reactivity. I would have to start to read actual experts in that field to learn about it, like anyone else.

And, analytical chemists know less than me about reactions. Analytical chemists study how to detect chemicals, not how those chemicals behave. Development of detection techniques is their field, not knowledge of the reactivity of elements.

So, you need to learn more about how assess an argument, not the credentials of the person who's making it.

As to the grounds for diagnosis of polio in the fifties, I'll ask my dad. He was a med student and intern at U. Pittsburgh in the early fifties, and during his years there the children's polio ward had 300 beds, all of them always filled. That's what he remembers most from med school, actually: the overwhelming number of children so seriously ill with polio, who have now disappeard, due to the vaccine that was developed down the hall from where he worked.

I would have to start to read actual experts in that field to learn about it, like anyone else.

Clarkson and Magos are first in my mind for this category.

As to the grounds for diagnosis of polio in the fifties, I’ll ask my dad.

This will certainly be interesting, but I'll point out that what is being invoked is the Greenberg Gambit* – based on a transcript from a 1960 meeting of the Illinois Medical Association (if they manage to get that far), biostatistician Bernard Greenberg argued that the effectiveness of the Salk vaccine could not be pinned down precisely because of a change in diagnostic criteria from 1955 to 1959.*

In one of the few useful whale-dot-to entries, Thomas Kavanagh outlines things.

* Yes, I do claim priority.
** I'm too damned uptight at the moment to find it, but I'm pretty sure I've posted at least a link to poor scans of the Illinois Medical Journal PDFs here before, if you search for the magic words.

Damn I'm sick of these people. The way these people catastrophize autism and de-humanize people with it is vomit inducing. I'm on the spectrum and I went to a transition school that was mostly ASD students with a few other behavioral/learning disorder students thrown in as well. We're people. Not chimps, not dogs. We're people. Not that the anti-vaxxers will ever believe that...

Narad:

** I’m too damned uptight at the moment to find it, but I’m pretty sure I’ve posted at least a link to poor scans of the Illinois Medical Journal PDFs here before, if you search for the magic words.

I think I found what you are refering to (although it may be a different scan): The Present Status Of Polio Vaccines (August 1960)

And part two of the article is in the same file: The Present Status Of Polio Vaccines: Part two (September 1960)

@ScienceMom That’s a poor excuse. Is it all right to use the reference dose for methanol on ethanol?

Not really. First of all, the EPA reference dose is known for methanol. Secondly, Hg is much larger than OH, and the addition of another carbon represents a much smaller change in mass and structure. Hg is toxic in and of itself.

Both meHg and etHg end up in the brain and liver and cause very similar toxicity. People have been poisoned by small amounts of etHg on seeds and rice.

@Narad because of a change in diagnostic criteria from 1955 to 1959.
What I read was that meningitis and coxsackievirus used to be grouped in as polio, but after some time in the late 50's, they were all categorized separately.

Did anyone get the Queen joke?

Not really. First of all, the EPA reference dose is known for methanol. Secondly, Hg is much larger than OH, and the addition of another carbon represents a much smaller change in mass and structure. Hg is toxic in and of itself.

Oh good grief.

Both meHg and etHg end up in the brain and liver and cause very similar toxicity. People have been poisoned by small amounts of etHg on seeds and rice.

Oh FFS, that was methylmercury and it's no small amount. They do not have similar toxicity by any stretch. Could you please avail yourself of literature that doesn't involve cranks? Anyone save Bartholomew Cubbins excellent explanation of Burbacher's monkey study? It doesn't seem to be available on his blog any more. Stradlater would benefit greatly if he is actually interested in learning.

#119, Science Mom

Are you thinking of this: https://archive.org/details/BConScienceBartholomewCubbinsonAutismEpisod…

Other episodes: https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22BC+on+Science%22

That's the one Troels and thank you very much. I urge Stradlater to watch and learn.

@ScienceMom Oh FFS, that was methylmercury and it’s no small amount

No, it was ethyl mercury on the rice:

Ethyl Mercury Poisoning in China: https://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search2/f?./temp/~PaaLjg:22

This study says that Thimerosal metabolizes into etMg and meHg: Of the total mercury found in the brain after TM exposure, 63% was in the form of Ino-Hg, with 13.5% as Et-Hg and 23.7% as Met-Hg.

https://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search2/f?./temp/~PaaLjg:61

Wow. That is more methyl mercury than ethyl mercury!

I don't think that etHg is as innocuous as you think.

No, it was ethyl mercury on the rice:

Ok my bad. Did you note the amounts ingested or are you just reading the abstract and getting your knickers all twisted up?

Wow. That is more methyl mercury than ethyl mercury!

I don’t think that etHg is as innocuous as you think.
One of these things is not like the other. Did you note the doses? Did you note this?

Taken together, our data demonstrated that the toxicokinetics of TM is completely different from that of Met-Hg. Thus, Met-Hg is not an appropriate reference for assessing the risk from exposure to TM-derived Hg. It also adds new data for further studies in the evaluation of TM toxicity.

How good is your toxicologist, analytical chemist and lawyer now?

No, Stradlater, I didn't read anything in your comments that even provoked a grin, much less a reall chuckle.

But since you'd like to toss around pop references, I'll ask, "Did you choose to dial it all the way up to 11, or were you just Born This Way?"

https://youtu.be/wV1FrqwZyKw

@Troels #120 Nice vid!

He did write the formula wrong for ethyl mercury:
CH₃-CH₃-HG

@ScienceMom Your argument does not follow. The author above was comparing thimerosal to meHg, but Dr. King was comparing etHg to meHg

ScienceMom, I think I remember reading your arguments somewhere.....Oh yeah....They come straight out of The Eli Lilly Handbook for Thimerosal Apologists Vol. III

We have at least 3 diseases caused by Mercury Poisoning: Acrodynia, Kawasaki's, and Minamata's. And no ScienceMom, Kawasaki's Disease does not come from riding motorcycles. KD increases with vaccine rates and is more common in fish-eating populations.

After a substantial increase in infants’ exposure to mercury from routine vaccinations, KD immediately rose tenfold over a period of five years (1985-1990). By 1997, KD had increased 20-fold from its initial figure in 1985. Prior to this epidemic increase, the incidence of KD had remained at a fairly low, constant rate for over a decade after the first US case had been recognized in 1975 [72-74].[KD=Kawasaki's Disease]
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23656523_Kawasaki's_Disease_Ac…

@SquirrelElite

[Freddy] Mercury Poisoning caused by listening to Queen. As someone that has listened to Bohemian Rhapsody multiple times in succession, I can tell you that it can happen.

@ScienceMom Your argument does not follow. The author above was comparing thimerosal to meHg, but Dr. King was comparing etHg to meHg

Oh Dear!

Kawasaki’s Disease does not come from riding motorcycles. KD increases with vaccine rates and is more common in fish-eating populations.

Oh Double Dear! It's amateur epi by VAERS.

Well, 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/kawasaki-disease/basics/c…

No one knows what causes Kawasaki disease, but scientists don't believe the disease is contagious from person to person. A number of theories link the disease to bacteria, viruses or other environmental factors, but none has been proved. Certain genes may increase your child's susceptibility to Kawasaki disease.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14014340 "Childhood vaccinations’ studied did not increase the risk of Kawasaki disease; conversely, vaccination was associated with a transient decrease in Kawasaki disease incidence. Verifying and understanding this potential protective effect could yield clues to the underlying etiology of Kawasaki disease."

Well, 2 out of 3 ain’t bad.

Fling enough poo at the wall...

Yeah, I forgot the sarcasm tag.

Secondly, Hg is much larger than OH, and the addition of another carbon represents a much smaller change in mass and structure. Hg is toxic in and of itself.

This is astoundingly ignorant. You small changes in structure can produce vastly different effects. The example I like to give for this is dextromethorphan or Robitussin. It's sterioisomer is levomethorphan. Robitussin is an antitussive and disassociative; levomethorphan is an opioid analgesic.

Sterioisomers have the same formula and structure, they are just oriented differently. It doesn't matter the size or degree of difference, if two molecules are not identical you can't assume they behave identically. This is neither horseshoes nor hand grenades. I'm disappointed that I have to make this point twice in the same thread.

I deduced you were referring to Freddy.

A quick perusal of YouTube turns up Adam Lambert, Pink, Beyoncé, as well as 10 Tenors and 4 bassoons, not to mention the Simpsons and the Muppets.

I suffer a mild form of the same effect from hearing the same Pandora playlists as background music at work.

But, more to the point, are the side effects of drinking 2 liters of 5% beer really the same as those from the same volume and concentration of methyl alcohol?

In support of the point made by capnkrunch, Thalidomide is a chiral molecule. One enantiomer is therapeutically useful, the other teratogenic. The obvious experiment has been tried, and racemization spoils the clever dick.

Not really ignorant at all. Hg with any side group is astoundingly toxic. Both meHg and etHg are dealkylated into inorganic Hg in the brain. The closest thing to etHg is meHg mercury, and the only reason that people compare the two is due to the relative paucity of data on etHg.

You are talking about molecules that have no inherently toxic elements but differ in stereochemisty. I am talking about two alkylated toxic heavy metals.

Did you know that progesterone and THC are isomers?

The only other organic Mercury compound that the EPA has a reference dose for is phenylmercury acetate. This is because it was used in indoor latex paint and represented an environmental hazard. The reference dose for this is half of that for methyl mercury.

Until the EPA has a reference dose for etHg, then the best approximation to use is probably meHg.

@SquirellElite

Obviously not. The difference in toxicity between ethanol and methanol is much larger (by orders of magnitude) than between etHg and meHg (same order of magnitude).

It is unfair to make this comparison. This is another argument from the Eli Lilly Manual for Thimersal Apologists Vol III

Secondly, Hg is much larger than OH, and the addition of another carbon represents a much smaller change in mass and structure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3foXJfWlgoM

I think I found what you are refering to (although it may be a different scan)

Yup. It's also a better scan overall, despite the tint. Thanks especially for finding the link to part 2; I'm not really familiar with this neck of the archive.org woods, as I mainly just use the PACER/RECAP archive.

The toxic nature of ethylmercury has been considered to be fairly similar to that of methylmercury
salts. In the recommendations of the international committee on Maximum Allowable Concentration
for mercury and its compounds, ethylmercury was grouped with methylmercury. Reports on human
intoxication with ethylmercury salts have usually reported symptoms similar to those of methylmercury,
which is accentuated by the typical neurological symptoms, although there have been a few
reports that noted slightly different symptoms from the typical features of methylmercury poisoning.
In acute experiments on animals, ethylmercury has an LD50 similar to that of methylmercury salts and
a high neurotoxicity similar to that of methylmercury. (p. 209–210)
Suzuki, T., Takemoto, T. L., Kashiwazaki, H., and Miyama, T. 1973. Metabolic fate of ethylmercury salts in man and animals. In Mercury,
mercurials, mercaptans, eds. M. W. Miller and T. W. Clarkson, pp. 209–240. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas,

This is astoundingly ignorant. You small changes in structure can produce vastly different effects. The example I like to give for this is dextromethorphan or Robitussin.

I take it that this is a response to Stradlater, who is well ensconced in my killfile with the rest of the crew. A more direct observation is that ethylmercury is preferentially nephrotoxic, whereas methylmercury prefers neurotoxicity.

But hey, what's an, erm, "carbon" between moieties?

And from Dr. Fagan: Although Thiomersal is an ethyl
mercury compound, it has similar toxicological properties to methyl mercury and the long-term
neurological sequelae produced by the ingestion of either methyl or ethyl mercury-based fungicides
are indistinguishable.

Fagan, D. G., Pritchard, J. S., Clarkson, T. W., and Greenwood, M. R. 1977. Organ mercury levels in infants with omphaloceles treated
with organic mercurial antiseptic. Arch. Dis. Child. 52:962–964.

1977? 1973? The cherry-picking is yielding increasingly old and shriveled fruit.

Our friend is currently scraping citations from one of the Geiers' exercises in fraudulent mendacity -- from when they were still on the mercury / chelation grift, before they made the shift to pimping themselves as aluminium Expert Witnesses -- hence the eccentric line breaks in the copy-pasted text.

We have at least 3 diseases caused by Mercury Poisoning: Acrodynia, Kawasaki’s, and Minamata’s.

And surely all of these were likely mistaken for polio as well?

@Stradiater

You write: “There are numerous cases of the Polio Vaccine causing Polio.
Not even the CDC denies the existence of Vaccine-Derived Polio Virus: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6423a4.htm

Prior to the US in 1999 switch to the killed polio vaccine, around six cases per year were attributed to the attenuated oral Sabin polio vaccine. However, prior to the advent of polio vaccines an average of 15,000 or more, mainly kids, were paralyzed every year. While even a single paralyzed child is an immense tragedy, the simple math is 15,000 to 6. And now with the usage of the killed (inactivated) polio vaccine, zero cases have been attributed to the vaccine. Given that prior to the WHO program to eliminate polio close to 400,000 paralyzed cases occurred every year in the Third World, now down to less than 200, the risk of the vaccine causing polio is far outweighed by the benefit. Once the natural virus is no longer found in the environment the WHO will probably start using the killed vaccine. Your choice of the word “numerous” is biased, numerous compared to what, 400,000?

As I wrote in my previous comment, antivaccinationists see the world in black and white. They want a vaccine to be 100% effective and with zero risk. While that would be nice, we live in the real world and the benefits of vaccines outweigh exponentially the risks. Keep in mind that as long as the natural microbes exist anywhere in the world, we are only a plane flight away from vaccine-preventable diseases if we drop our guard, that is, lower our rates of vaccination.

However, I’m glad you pointed out that the CDC openly admits that vaccines are NOT 100% safe which just proves my point that antivaccinationists either don’t bother to actually check and just parrot others or outright lie.

Oral polio vaccine is still heavily used in areas where polio remains in circulation. In April of this year the vaccine was changed, in a massive coordinated effort, from a trivalent type to a bivalent type that no longer includes the Type 2 strain. This strain appears to have been eradicated from wild circulation and is also the vaccine strain that account for the great majority of the cases of vaccine-associate paralytic polio.

@Stradiater #82

You refer to two papers on mercury. First, mercury is ubiquitous in our environment and many years ago the amount in the environment was much higher than today. Our bodies have evolved to deal with it, that is, as long as the amounts are small. Our bodies can excrete it, sequester it, and transform it. The amount of mercury that was in vaccines (no longer in vaccines except the flu vaccine and one can get thimerosal-free flu vaccine) was less than the mercury found in an average meal of fish. In addition, mercury has a half-life, that is, the body gets rid of half of it, in a short time span, so when kids get shots spaced apart, it is wrong to give the total amount of mercury as if they got it at once. Second, numerous studies have found NO association between thimerosal in vaccines and autism. No study, regardless of how well done, is perfect and one can find minor methodological flaws in every study. However, science doesn’t work by one study despite newspapers playing them up and antivaccinationists looking for every possible possible weakness. Science is based on a cumulation of evidence. Causal inference does NOT prove something; but eliminates other possible explanations. For instance, if numerous studies find NO difference between females and males, then one can rule out gender as a possible contributing factor. When numerous studies done by different researchers, in different countries, on different populations, with slightly different designs and measurements, all find NO association between thimerosal and autism, that is STRONG evidence there isn’t one.

@Stradiater #90

Yep, 1 in 6 kids have some developmental problem. What exactly does that mean? And has the numbers changed over the past 50 to 100 years? With the reforms to our education system, legislation requiring schools to deal with kids with problems, and with our ever increasing taxonomy of abilities, behaviors, we now notice and diagnose things that would not have been classified only a generation ago. One example is Asberger’s syndrome. It was first added as a classification only about 20 years ago. There have now been cases of men, perhaps women as well, who have sought out and been diagnosed with Asperger’s in their 70s. Did they suddenly develop Asberger’s? Nope. They had always been considered “different” but excelled at jobs such as computer programmers. As Lorna Wing, a well-known British autism researcher, once wrote: “It doesn’t exist until you give it a name.” My paraphrase of what she said. And I know of numerous cases of kids with dyslexia who were labeled slow/retarded. Now we diagnose dyslexia and today’s kids with dyslexia often excel. And on and on it goes.

Your problem is you read something and don't try to understand it. If it conforms to what you choose to believe, that is all that counts

@ Joel Harrison, you missed the unintentional comedy Stradlater unleashed using those claims. Cribbing from Paul King he claimed that the DT vaccine caused an increase in polio cases and that 1 in 6 children were mercury-poisoned in spite of finding the original stat on the CDC page. And now etHg is just like meHg because, reasons.

@Stradiater #118

You write: “@Narad because of a change in diagnostic criteria from 1955 to 1959.
What I read was that meningitis and coxsackievirus used to be grouped in as polio, but after some time in the late 50’s, they were all categorized separately.”

Yep, what you read. I suggest you actually really do some serious reading. Start by going to your local university library and reading:

Sutter RW et al. (2013). Chapter 28. Poliovirus vaccine—live. In Plotkin SA et al (Eds). Vaccine 6th Edition. Elsevier. pp. 598-645.

You can also find a table on differential diagnosis, that is how various causes of paralysis can be distinguished:

WHO (1996). Field Guide: For Supplementary Activities aimed at achieving polio eradication. 1996 Revision. pp.10-12. Available at: http://www.who.int/immunization/monitoring_surveillance/resources/Field…

There has been found in the past that a small percentage of cases thought to be polio were caused by other factors, discussed in the Sutter chapter; but the differential diagnosis presented was known and applied prior to advent of the vaccine. I have articles giving the criteria from the 1940s. In addition, serological tests can not only distinguish between polio and other viruses; but between vaccine-caused and wildtype. As I keep writing, this isn’t a perfect world; but the differential diagnosis of polio historically tells us that the vast majority of cases were polio.

Another worthwhile read is: John R. Paul (1971). History of Poliomyelitis. Yale University Press.

One of the key points in diagnosing polio is a paralysis that lasts at least 60 days. Whereas some cases of polio did improve, other viruses more often than not involved shorter periods of paralysis that resolved and the pattern/progression is different.

Stradlater, everytime you post one of your comments, God kills a puppy. Please stop killing all the puppies.

the addition of another carbon represents a much smaller change in mass and structure. Hg is toxic in and of itself.
Tragic mercury -- Who knew that latex could act like a wick, increasing the surface area of exposure?

Dimethyl mercury, first synthesized in 1865, easily penetrates biological membranes and, in humans, turns into methyl mercury--a former crop fumigant. The World Health Organization outlawed the chemical for use as a fungicide in 1974 after an episode in which it killed 600 people in Iraq.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/1997/06/mercury-poisoning-kills-lab-chem…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Wetterhahn

So, yea; What's an extra methyl amongst eggheads?

@Science Mom #148

Sorry, I'm getting old, can't catch everything. However, if DT vaccine responsible for polio, since DT vaccine continued to be used after polio vaccine introduced, how does Stradiator explain the rapidly decreasing number of cases of paralytic polio? And given that thimerosal has been removed from all but the flu vaccine, how does he explain the 1 in 6 post-thimerosal kids with disabilities?

One last point that he and other antivaccinationists fail to understand is what Paracelsus said 500 years ago: "the dose makes the poison." I am a senior citizen, vegan, and still blood donor, so I take an iron supplement daily. However, though iron is necessary for the body, if I were to swallow the entire bottle I would be in serious trouble. I avoid as much as possible use of any type of medication; but on occasion if I have a headache or really achy muscles I take a couple of aspirin. Aspirin is not a substance that our bodies normally use; but it works. However, if I were to take the entire bottle I would die a rather unpleasant death. Obviously mercury has no known benefit/use by our bodies; but as with just about everything else, our bodies can handle small amounts.

Antivaccinationists often quote papers doing in vitro studies, that is, applying some form of mercury directly to cells. There are numerous papers that discuss problems with in vitro studies. Cells in our body do not work in isolation.

One example is the sulfanilamide's. In the 1930s, German scientist Gerhard Domagyk discovered that a dye which he named Prontosil killed gram positive bacteria in animal studies and then human studies. The first antimicrobial to really work. French scientists later discovered the active ingredient in Prontosil was sulfanilamide. However, as opposed to the standard progression, Domagyk never tested prontosil first on cell cultures. If he had, it would not have worked as the French discovered that the body metabolized it and transformed it to sulfanilamide. So, an in vitro study and we would not have had one of the first effective antimicrobial. Just one example of a problem with in vitro tests.

"...if DT vaccine (was) responsible for polio, since DT vaccine continued to be used after polio vaccine introduced, how does Stradiator explain the rapidly decreasing number of cases of paralytic polio?"

Well duh, it's because polio cases never diminished, the medical establishment just calls them by other names now.

"And given that thimerosal has been removed from all but the flu vaccine, how does he explain the 1 in 6 post-thimerosal kids with disabilities?"

There's still thimerosal in vaccines, it doesn't matter how few micrograms, a toxin is a toxin, speaking of which how about the aluminum, antifreeze, sucrose, aborted fetal organs and other toxins they never removed?

Joel, at this rate you'll never win at antivax bingo.

@ squirrelelite

Jokes aren't always meant to be funny. Whatever Strad's intent, his joke was not funny. You got the reference to Freddy, but not the joke. I'm not sure Strad gets his own joke either. To wit:

Mercury poisoning is likened to the behavior of teenagers listening to Freddy Mercury sing 'Bohemian Rhapsody'. Strad refers to this as "behavior abnormalities". The punch-line of the clip is at 1:48 when the riders in the Mirthmobile begin head-banging. Though Queen is a 'glam' band, the kids are nominally part of a heavy metal subculture.

All of which parallels Strads efforts to link thimerosal to ASD, including comparing the symptoms of mercury poisoning to the symptoms of autism.

Thus, the 'joke' is that Wayne, Garth, Terry, Alan and Phil are autistic, as ingesting (Freddie) Mercury leads to the abnormality of head-banging. Which is, of course, the stereotypical signifier of autism-as-blight. At the same time, Strad is characterizing autistics as "abnormal" – "deviating in a way that is undesirable or worrying" – and doing a point-and-laugh at their supposed 'abnormality'.

Funny? No. Disgusting and all too familiar? Yup.

Gilbert--

Lots of people were aware of the sad case of Karen Wetterhahn before you heard of it (assuming that "who knew?" expresses genuine surprise rather than condescension). Has it occurred to you that there is a Wikipedia article about this particular death because it was very unusual?

Can you name three things that you eat, drink, or take as medicine or supplements regularly that have never harmed anyone?

King’s 1 in 6 children are mercury poisoned,

From King's handout or whatever:

Autism is prevalent
• 1 out of 6 children are identified with a developmental disorder and/or behavioral problem

I wrote about this back in 2011. The source for that figure is:

Pediatrics, May 2011
Trends in the Prevalence of Developmental Disabilities in US Children, 1997–2008
Coleen A. Boyle, Sheree Boulet, Laura A. Schieve, Robin A. Cohen, Stephen J. Blumberg, Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsopp, Susanna Visser, Michael D. Kogan

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/05/19/peds.201…

From the article linked above:

Participants and Methods: We used data on children aged 3 to 17 years from the 1997–2008 National Health Interview Surveys, which are ongoing nationally representative samples of US households. Parent-reported diagnoses of the following were included: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; intellectual disability; cerebral palsy; autism; seizures; stuttering or stammering; moderate to profound hearing loss; blindness; learning disorders; and/or other developmental delays.

What I wrote at the time:

Screening for and remediating learning disorders are my areas of expertise. I would say the one in six figure (16.6%) is possibly low. Dyslexia is classed as a developmental disability. Some dyslexia experts put the actual prevalence rate at up to 20%.

It would be a great day for children in America if all students were screened for dyslexia at the end of kindergarten, so that appropriate remediation could begin immediately. Of course, instituting such a course of action would mean a rise in both incidence and prevalence. What a terrible thing! Not.

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2011/11/one-in-six-childre…

Can you name three things that you eat, drink, or take as medicine or supplements regularly that have never harmed anyone?

I meant no condescension, Vicki -- It was not known until the incident. Otherwise; Cannabis, honeysuckle dew, and kaolinite.

You write: “@Narad because of a change in diagnostic criteria from 1955 to 1959.
What I read was that meningitis and coxsackievirus used to be grouped in as polio, but after some time in the late 50’s, they were all categorized separately.”

Recall:

Does anyone know how Polio was diagnosed in the 30’s, 40’s, and 50’s? Is it likely that someone suffering from mercury poisoning would receive a “polio” diagnosis?

Mercury exits stage left and now "meningitis" and Coxsackie make entrances instead? This is precisely the Greenberg Gambit. (I b0rk3d the earlier link, but Kavanagh even mentions the author of this piece.)

Trends in the Prevalence of Developmental Disabilities in US Children, 1997–2008

I could swear that I've seen a more quantitative figure for diagnosis shedding,* but anyway:

"Finally, although we assumed that many of these conditions are chronic, in fact, a condition may resolve to the point where parents or health care providers may no longer consider the child as having the disorder. Recent evidence [PMID 19805460, PMID 20159870] of this was found for autism, and a longitudinal study showed considerable changes in diagnoses over time for children with physical and emotional or behavior diagnoses. Finally, some children included in the stuttering or stammering or seizures categories may have had transient conditions, resulting in an overestimation of the prevalence of these conditions."

* Ah – probably the second reference, Van Cleave et al., PMID 20159870.

@ Gilbert #151

According to both the Science Magazine and the Wikipedia article, “dimethylmercury had raised her {Wetterhahn’s] blood mercury level to 4,000 micrograms per liter, or 80 times the toxic threshold.” According to Wikipedia on the Iraqi experience with mercury-impregnated seeds: “The seeds contained an average of 7.9 μg/g of mercury, with some samples containing up to nearly twice that. The decision to use mercury-coated grain has been reported as made by the Iraqi government, rather than the supplier, Cargill. . . Anywhere between 20 and 40 mg of mercury has been suggested as sufficient for paresthesia (between 0.5 and 0.8 mg/kg of body weight[9]). On average, individuals affected consumed 20 kg or so of bread; the 73,000 tonnes provided would have been sufficient for over 3 million cases.” (Wikipedia “1971 Iraq poison grain disaster”)

You can find a list of studies on Thimerosal and Vaccines at: http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/cc-thim.htm

And the WHO (2006) states: “Many licensed vaccines do not contain thiomersal. Such vaccines include vaccines in single-dose presentation or vaccines for which thiomersal would interfere with vaccine efficacy such as live vaccines including MMR, oral and inactivated polio, yellow fever, and BCG vaccine. These vaccines, however, when in multi-dose presentations, have to be discarded at the end of the immunization session. Other vaccines may contain trace amounts of thiomersal (<0.5 µg per dose), if the preservative has been used in the production process, but has not been added to the final product. A third group of vaccines have thiomersal added in varying concentrations (10 to 50 µg per dose) as a preservative to prevent contamination with microorganisms when formulated in multi-dose vials. Such vaccines include vaccines against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP), diphtheria and tetanus toxoids (DT), tetanus toxoid (TT), hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), and influenza.” Available at: http://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/committee/topics/thiomersal/questions…

So the highest amount is 50 micrograms per dose. A 1000 times 50 micrograms would be 0.05 milligrams. If you use “between 20 and 40 mg” it is 1/400th. But there is also the route of introduction into the body. Even if an infant received the DTP, hep b, Hib, and influenza, it would be a maximum of 200 micrograms, 1/100th. But they usually don’t get all four at once and, thus, the half life would intervene. And, as I wrote before: “A study of blood levels of mercury following receipt of thimerosal-containing vaccines in premature infants found that the blood half-life of intramuscular ethyl mercury is shorter than that of oral methyl mercury in adults. Pichichero ME, et al. Mercury Levels in Premature and Low Birth Weight Newborn Infants after Receipt of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines. J Pediatr 2009 [PubMed abstract]”

So, despite what the articles said about Wetterhahn it is difficult to know how much she actually got, even possible that the episode mentioned was just the last of several exposures. In addition, referring to the Iraq incident is meaningless as there are many heavy metals and other elements that can kill if exposed to extremely high doses and they were definitely exposed to extremely high doses. If I took the equivalent amount in iron supplements I would be in trouble and if I took the equivalent in aspirin, in real trouble.

I repeat what I wrote earlier, mercury is ubiquitous in our environment. On average, the amount of mercury in fish, especially for those who eat fish on a regular basis, e.g. once per week, would expose infants and children to more than the minuscule amounts that were in vaccines since they have been removed from all vaccines in the US except flu vaccine. I repeat also what Paracelus wrote 500 years ago: “the dose makes the poison.”

You comment is typical for an antivaccinationists, that is, you find something, don’t bother to really research it and try to understand it in context and just post it. No thinking or reflection need get in the way.

Dimethyl mercury:
In 1972, a 28-year-old chemist in Czechoslovakia had suffered the same symptoms as Wetterhahn after synthesizing 6 kg of the compound.[2][6]

Whackyweedia, I am very disappointed in you.

Ignore that last comment. Need more coffee.

Not even the CDC denies the existence of Vaccine-Derived Polio Virus

Not to be confused with VAPP, as it appears to have been here.

Pathetic.

#161 You can find a list of studies on Thimerosal and Vaccines at: http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/cc-thim.htm

And a much bigger list here: http://mercury-freedrugs.org/docs/071130_Geier_etal_PublishedReviewOfTh…

What ever happened to Mercurochrome??

@Joel all find NO association between thimerosal and autism, that is STRONG evidence there isn’t one.

Untrue. The original Verstraeten study showed a RR of 7.62 for Autism at a dose of >25μg given during the first month of life.

It is obvious that the subsequent revisions to the study were made to attenuate the obvious link between DD and Hg.

Anywhere between 20 and 40 mg of mercury has been suggested as sufficient for paresthesia (between 0.5 and 0.8 mg/kg of body weight[9]).

This is predictably slovenly W—dia writing* – oral ingestion of 40 mg of elemental Hg (0.003 ml) wouldn't even register. The text cites a personal communication from Clarkson regarding methylmercury.

* With some seeming embellishment.

@Sadmar

Where have I seen your avatar before.....Are you a member of the Lollypop Guild?

@ Sradiator #168

You write: “Untrue. The original Verstraeten study showed a RR of 7.62 for Autism at a dose of >25μg given during the first month of life.
It is obvious that the subsequent revisions to the study were made to attenuate the obvious link between DD and Hg.”

The original Verstraeten study was a pilot study where he ONLY looked at electronic databases. It was his first study at the CDC. The experts, as I and any one else trained in research, requested he do a random chart audit as it has been found umpteen times that data entry is rife with errors. Based on what was found from the actual medical chart audits, the final report was written. Of course, for antivaccinationists this is unacceptable. However, if the original electronic data base study had found NO association and the subsequent medical chart audit had found one, then, of course, antivaccinationists would support the chart audit. In other words, antivaccinationists ignore established scientific methods and pick and choose whatever confirms their rigid ideology. A pilot study is done, not to find any conclusions; but to hone ones methodology, something I’m sure you don’t understand or don’t want to understand.

# 166 you refer to a paper by Geier. Well, I have several papers by them and I wouldn’t give much credit to anything they write. In several of their previous papers I obtained a number of the referenced articles and, well, I’ll just keep this civil.

The Geiers believe it is perfectly acceptable to chemically-castrate children with autism....enough said.

How do you explain how the CDC "lost" the data for the Verstraeten Study? Is this just a coincidence?

Many people, myself include, see this as evidence of guilt.

wouldn’t give much credit to anything they write
Have you found any untrue statements in that paper on Thimerosal? Have the Geiers been caught make making false statements?

Maybe it's that time in a young Stradlater's life when someone will explain the purpose of search boxes.

The Geiers?

Yes and yes....which is why the "Doctor" of the two lost all his medical licenses and the other was found guilty of practicing medicine without a license

Seriously, 30 seconds using Google would have given you the answers.

@ Stradiator #173

You write: "How do you explain how the CDC “lost” the data for the Verstraeten Study? Is this just a coincidence?
Many people, myself include, see this as evidence of guilt."

And to what do you base your claim that the data was "lost." I found it was made available to other researchers by the CDC.

For one take on the entire affair, I suggest your read Emily Willingham's article "Is The CDC Hiding Data About Mercury, Vaccines, And Autism?" from Feb 22, 2014 at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2014/02/22/is-the-cdc-hidin…

I could supply additional references; but I doubt you really care about the truth.

@ Lawrence

Good post. A couple of other tidbits about the Geiers:
1. They claim to have a world class lab in their basement.
2. They ran several alternative medicine clinics, so they have a financial stake in their position. Antivaccinationists like to attack people who support vaccines because of "financial interests". Rather hypocritical, wouldn't you say?

@Joel

I had already read that Forbes paper complete with notes from Dr. King: http://dr-king.com/docs/20140314_PGK_sRebuttalTo_IsTheCDCHidingDataAbou…

This was CDC's response to an inquiry on the Verstaeten Data: Safety of Neonatal Hepatitis B Administration, we were informed that the CDC spoke with the study’s primary author and determined that the datasets for the study will not be available in a format acceptable for re-analysis. Subsequent communication revealed that the dataset was stored on obsolete media, then it was acknowledged that the dataset had been damaged, and finally it was revealed that the dataset containing the raw data no longer existed.

So first it was damaged, then it was destroyed! I bet it was Eli Lilly himself that took a flamethrower to the microfiche or whatever clandestine obsolete media they used to store the media.

@Joel : Antivaccinationists like to attack people who support vaccines because of “financial interests”. Rather hypocritical, wouldn’t you say?

Maybe for some. Not all antivaccinationists have a financial stake in the matter and are not being hypocritical in the manner you stated above.

You are stereotyping antivaccinationists.

CORRECTION:

The CDC's response to the Verstraeten study was this: Some VSD final datasets not available

The one above was for the Hep B vaccine obviously.

Gilbert, #167:
"What ever happened to Mercurochrome?"
Back in the '90s, I think it was, when the FDA finally got around to evaluating grandfathered remedies, they found no useful studies of its safety. Because of the very low cost of manufacture and low profit margin, no company wanted to pay for safety testing, and none of them made a fuss when the FDA classed it as "untested" and pulled it from the market. France did the same later.
I have reason to recall that period because a lot of useless crap was swept from the shelves, especially that instrument of torture known as terpin hydrate.

I can't remember for sure, but Tincture of Merthiolate (an alcohol solution of thimerosal) showed up on the Canadian market around the same time or somewhat after Mercurochrome. I certainly remember using both.
There have been many topical antiseptics that were once popular that really were never much good for the intended purpose. To my disgust, there are several products still marketed under the name Methiolate that are different compounds - not that I long for the days of mercury, but I object to reuse of a name for Something Completely
Different.

Somewhere upstream S mentioned the infant deaths associated with application of thimerosal to omphaloceles. Given the strength of the typical preparations (on the order of 20 milligrams per millilitre), and the fact that application to an omphalocele would be not unlike intraperitoneal injection, it is scarcely surprising the outcomes were bad.

Somewhere upstream S mentioned the infant deaths associated with application of thimerosal to omphaloceles. Given the strength of the typical preparations (on the order of 20 milligrams per millilitre), and the fact that application to an omphalocele would be not unlike intraperitoneal injection, it is scarcely surprising the outcomes were bad.

This is antivaccine canon, except that the internal organs hanging out of the body are replaced with "umbilical cords." I haven't read the original paper in a while, but I suspect that this application may not have had an appreciable effect on survival in the first place.

OMG! Olympic swimmer Micheal Phelps has measles!

http://cdn.collegespun.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Screen-Shot-2016-…

He must have caught it from the mercury in the water. BAN ALL SWIMMING!!!

Seriously, did you know they put CHLORINE in the water in the swimming pool!!! Chlorine "is extremely dangerous and poisonous for all living organisms, and was used in World War I as the first gaseous chemical warfare agent"!!!!!!!!!

#173

Mark Geier: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Geier

Not hard to find if you actually want to look...

The Geiers and Wakefield (who DO have significant financial interests in their anti-vax stances) all fall into the category of if I asked them what colour my black cat is I wouldn't believe them...

Oh bloody hell, those are cupping marks on the swimmers...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-37009240

*facepalm*

@Rebecca Fisher: I heard the announcer say something about "marks on the backs of the swimmers....popular treatment" but I was going to bed and didn't pay a lot of attention. I'm sure there is a lot of woo among Olympians; like all athletes, there is a ton of superstition (wearing the same socks, tying your shoes a certain way, etc) to "insure" winning. It's sad.

add note: I've tried (fire) cupping, out of curiosity. It felt weird, and I didn't like it. The bruises on my back weren't bad as the cups were only on for a few minutes. It certainly didn't "cure" anything. I suppose the heat may have led to some muscle relaxation. The heat itself felt nice (think heating pad) but I didn't like the suction sensation. I wouldn't bother to do it again, and I certainly would never have paid someone to do it.

The main point remains, that hazard was in fact rare.

On your three safe things: try googling "cannabis hyperemesis." The MSDS for kaolinite notes that it is hazardous if inhaled, and gives advice on treatment. Honeydew is probably the safest of the three, but there are people who are allergic to it.

The MSDS for kaolinite notes that it is hazardous if inhaled

Well, yea; So is water.

Hyperemesis rhymes with facetious, which is what I was being. I don't consume any of those things (well, not anymore) -- I'm just a stoner wannabe.

Back to Laura Hayes, she was letting her freak flag fly at AoA this morning:

I also took issue with the statement concerning why Democrats proposed and passed SB277. They had plans to do so years prior, but decided to begin "smaller", with AB2109...then working their way up to SB277. The "Disneyland measles outbreak" certainly seemed like a contrived and purposefully-timed hoax to me, or at the very least, the next "outbreak" opportunity waiting to be seized upon by the vaccine profiteers and their many minions.

The “Disneyland measles outbreak” certainly seemed like a contrived and purposefully-timed hoax to me, or at the very least, the next “outbreak” opportunity waiting to be seized upon by the vaccine profiteers and their many minions.

Because passing legislation is so profitable how?

Because passing legislation is so profitable how?

I bet Big Pharma is paid by the word.

@Gaist

They are certainly paid per vaccine.

And if legislalation sells more vaccines, then, yes! Legislation is indeed profitable.

This is simple logic people.

@monica:

They are certainly paid per vaccine.

And if legislalation sells more vaccines, then, yes! Legislation is indeed profitable.

Do you know what earns more for Big Pharma than two jabs of MMR?
The medication for treating just one case of measles, mumps, or rubella. In fact, it earns several times more.

@monica: reimbursement for an MMR is about $80, for the injection and the medication (which the doctor has to buy, along with the syringes for injection, by the way, so the profit is less than that.) Now, say I get paid $10/hour and I don't get any sick time or vacation time, like most minimum wage earners. So if my child gets the measles, I'm home for at least a week. That's a pay loss of $800 for me and my family. 10 times the cost of the vaccine. That's not counting paying for the doctor visit (we'll be generous and say there is only a $10 copay for that) or an ER visit ($50 copay). If my child needs medications, that's more money. And if my child unfortunately requires hospitalization, that's even more money.

Again, we'll be nice and go low on the fees. My doctor will make $40 from the office visit, $80 for the ER visit. $120 for every daily visit in the hospital because my kid will be in an isolation room.

It's MUCH cheaper for my kid to have the MMR, with the low risks of adverse events, than to have the measles, with a much higher risk.

(By the way, I work for evil health insurance, so I'm quite familiar with the fees allowed, at least the Medicare allowed amounts)

They are certainly paid per vaccine.

And if legislalation sells more vaccines, then, yes! Legislation is indeed profitable.

This is simple logic people.

OMH I thought monica was being sarcastic. What kind of numpty thinks this ^ is simple logic?

In another display of simple logic ( ha!) , AoA's Kim Stagliano wonders why George Takei is not defending anti-vaxxers/ vaccine injured in California, after the new law.
After all, he is a defender of those who are oppressed.

Andrew Wakefield.

We are still hearing that name after all of these years. I would have thought his debarment would have reduced his popularity, but it has not ebbed quite yet.

I would like to speak my mind, but I am unsure of the Libel laws on the web.

VAERS website — VAERS Data page:

More than 10 million vaccines per year are given to children less than 1 year old, usually between 2 and 6 months of age. At this age, infants are at greatest risk for certain medical adverse events, including high fevers, seizures, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Some infants will experience these medical events shortly after a vaccination by coincidence.

These coincidences make it difficult to know whether a particular adverse event resulted from a medical condition or from a vaccination.

Do you see the diabolical criminal sophistry?

Some infants will experience these medical events [seizures, death, etc.] shortly after a vaccination by coincidence.

By coincidence?

How is it sophistry? It was once suspected that vaccines cause SIDS. Then researchers at Bristol University looked at the question.
http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk/en/publications/reanalyses-of…

From the abstract of the above report:

"There is no increased or reduced risk of sudden infant death during the period after the vaccination."
Vaccines do not cause SIDS. The question was properly investigated and found to be coincidence.

@ Julian and MI Dawn

Monica posted a simple logic-fail, with more complex inference in context, yet I think neither of your replies either expose the logic error properly or refute the hinted-at-claim effectively.

MID's claim that the cost of the MMR is an 'insurance' bargain is simply irrelevant to the question of profits and 'profiteering', as it could be true even if the manufacturer was engaged in outrageous price gouging based on the cost, in which case pro-vax legislation would indeed be 'profitable' to the maker. But MID's point seems valid on it's own, and may have been addressed to monica just because monica's post moved MID to think about it, and it wasn't intended as a rejoinder to monica's claim...

Julian's argument is not just off-target, but dangerous, as it accepts and reproduces the premise of a unified Big Pharma conspiracy. There's no warrant to conclude the companies producing the MMR would be among the firms gaining revenue from "medication for treating measles, mumps, or rubella" – unless the pharmas have some secret profit-sharing deal I don't know about. Furthermore, even if the treatment meds sales went only to the vax manufacturers, the comparison wouldn't be profit from one vaxed kid vs. profit from one sick kid, but profits from all sick kids vs. loss of profits from enough unvaxed kids to compromise community immunity and lead to outbreaks. And, anyway, as a response to monica, the whole discussion begs the question, as there's no indication she's willing to grant that vaccines are indeed necessary to prevent VPDs.

Monica claimed the fact that vaccinations cost money proves they're profitable, therefore legislation that results in more shots being given is necessarily 'profitable' for the manufacturer. The logic flaw is the assumption that sales generate profit, when, of course, some products are sold at cost or at a loss for a variety of reasons. If the MMR does make a profit for its manufacturers, then, taken literally, the claim that legislation resulting in increased vaccinations is 'profitable' for the makers would be true if the price structure stays the same – but it is trivial. The question would be whether the legislation is profitable enough to the MMR makers for them to attempt to use their finite resources toward the costly effort of influencing said legislation, as opposed to spending them on other likely more profitable pursuits.

I can't be sure what monica intended. She might be asserting the MMR makes so much money that Big Pharma buys off legislators to greedily increase already-corrupt profitsmake enough money for Big Pharma. Or she may have taken Science Mom's 'passing legislation is so profitable how?' as a rhetorical question meaning 'legislation never results in profit', considered that absurd regardless of her take on vaccine issues, and just done a spectacularly bad job of expressing that point. Or she may indeed have been attempting sarcasm (I doubt it, but it's possible). In the context of the thread though, the comment is likely to be read as another utterance of the 'profiteering' thesis.

To dismiss the profiteering claim, you must point out that it would depends on evidence that the the specific vaccine in question is so hugely profitable, it's not just a corporate priority for standard sales promotion but a corporate priority for expensive and risky skull-duggery. With neither huge profits or even routine promotion in evidence, the 'profit-motive' argument is a no go.

Then, if you like, you could go on and attempt to utterly refute the claim by providing evidence that the profits from the MMR are not significant enough to it's makers for them to get all worked up about it. For example, you could point out that the vaccine court was established to insure continued production of essential vaccines, as potential liability costs would make the standard vaccine vaccine so economically perilous the pharmas would simply stop makiing them to preserve their bottom line. Of course, AVs would simply reject all your evidence as 'faked' by the great conspiracy, but, presumably, reasonable folks made wary by the sins of 'Big Pharma' in other areas might indeed consider that the 'profiteering' argument doesn't apply to standard vaccines.